Canton Vento vs Chrono SL (models with ceramic tweeters)

KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
I just wanted to set the record straight on the difference between the Vento and Chrono SL models that have the Ceramic tweeter!
I have both, the Vento 820.2 and the Chrono SL 536.2. These are bookshelf models which have the same driver complement except the Chrono has a 7" woofer while the Vento has a 6" woofer.
I attempted to disassemble them and got a good look at the crossover for the Vento after removing the woofer. The Chrono SL came out later after they started using a trim-ring on this woofer that I was not comfortable removing without cosmetic damage to the trim piece. However I could use an inspection mirror to compress the fiberfill dampening material and look around from the terminal plate opening which I could remove.
Doing this, I saw that the exact same number of components located in the same positions was used in both crossovers (the Vento XO was located on the terminal plate, the Chrono XO was mounted on one of the cross braces for the cabinet). The components were not identical, but I would not expect them to be, given different woofers.
Next, I compared these in an A-B configuration with instant level matched switching while listening to a wide array of music.
As far as I am concerned, these are sonically equivalent speakers (except that every now and again the larger woofer of the Chrono made a lower-bass distinction). But for upper-bass, mid-range, and treble, the Chrono SL matched the Vento too closely for me to notice any differences in the sound!
I am pretty convinced that the only difference between the Vento and the Chrono SL (models with the ceramic tweeter) is exclusively the cabinet! The manufacture of the Vento cabinet which is steamed and pressed into the curved shape is expensive, and while it is a very good looking cabinet, I believe that a standard box with judicious bracing can effectively match it for sound quality.
It is not surprising that Canton is doing this. That is exactly what they did with their Reference speakers and their A45 Anniversary Edition (which offers their Reference drivers in a standard box at a substantial reduction).
I believe these are an exceptional value because the Canton ceramic tweeter (which is clearly better than the very good ceramic tweeter used by Infinity in their Reference Series) is in the same class as the RAAL and Focal Be tweeters (which are more expensive to produce). IOW, Canton has developed a tweeter that delivers World Class performance at less expense. The one caveat is that the Canton tweeter is made with a fairly aggressive wave guide, while the RAAL and the Focal Be offerings are designed with broad dispersion. IME, the advantage/disadvantage of the wave guide depends on he type of music and room. For me, in my room, comparing the Vento against my Philharmonic BMR with different music content gets roughly a 60%/40% preference for the BMR. My room is more acousticly lively than ideal and I suspect that ratio would bias even more towards the BMR with room treatments (absorption).

Surveying Accessories4Less for the Chrono SL models that use the Ceramic tweeter gets:
Tower:
Chrono SL-596.2 @ $1280/pr (white only)
Bookshelf:
Chrono SL-536.2 @ $520/pr
Chrono SL-526.2 @ $440/pr (white only)
Center:
Chrono SL-556.2 @ $400/ea.
On-wall:
Chrono SL-516.2 @ $400/pr.
Most of the above indicate low stock, but I expect there will be more inventory arriving next year (I noticed these models listed as "Coming Soon" on the A4L site on 12/26/18). This year was the first that the version of the Chrono SL with this ceramic tweeter made it to the US/A4L!
(they also have in-wall and ceiling speakers with the ceramic tweeters, but the model numbers are totally different and I have not heard any of them, so consider them outside of the scope of this post)

If anyone in the Atlanta area want to listen to a pair of these, let me know and we'll set it up. I'll even let you take them home to compare with your own (after you sign over your first-born as collateral)!:)

I would consider any of the above a great buy because you are getting Vento equivalent sound at a greater discount and I know most of us are not too distraught over missing out on the curved "bug-shape" cabinets as long as the sound is not compromised.
 
Last edited:
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
@Trell I gather you are bi-lingual (German/English)!

If you use the link below, scroll down, and watch for the Bold Title of "Bugshape" just before the photos, It describes how important this shape is. I wonder if you might have any insight into what gets lost in translation. While I am a righteously proud owner of bugshaped speakers, it is unclear what makes them qualify as bugshaped or why I am proud of it! o_O

 
zieglj01

zieglj01

Audioholic Spartan
Yes the Chrono SL looks good -- maybe someday, I can swing for it. I also can live without a bug cabinet.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Look open box 299.99 holy crap. I'll blink my eyes and they will be gone. Holly Christmas!
$279
Neither of those has the ceramic tweeter. They are good for the cost, but I'd be inclined to get the JBL 530. The 502.2 tweeter is very good for an aluminum tweeter. The ceramic tweeter is worth saving the extra money for!
 
afterlife2

afterlife2

Audioholic Spartan
Neither of those has the ceramic tweeter. They are good for the cost, but I'd be inclined to get the JBL 530. The 502.2 tweeter is very good for an aluminum tweeter. The ceramic tweeter is worth saving the extra money for!
Maybe one day I will own those 530. I miss my JBL sound. So many great speakers to choose from for such delightful prices and Canton is top notch.
 
zieglj01

zieglj01

Audioholic Spartan
C

chemist323

Audioholic Intern
I just wanted to set the record straight on the difference between the Vento and Chrono SL models that have the Ceramic tweeter!
I have both, the Vento 820.2 and the Chrono SL 536.2. These are bookshelf models which have the same driver complement except the Chrono has a 7" woofer while the Vento has a 6" woofer.
Kew, thanks for the info. I'm really looking into the Canton's, particularly the Vento 896 v the 876 on AC4L. Interestingly, i found a german review on Low beats with the following:
"The small Canton Vento 876 was the surprise in comparison. We already tested the flagship 896 in August 2016 and were more than pleased. Could there be more? Not quantitatively, of course, qualitatively. The liveliness, the balance and the beautiful precision with which the 876 reproduces all kinds of music makes it the most interesting Vento floor box for me.
Those who have large rooms, appreciate a lot of bass and high levels are perfectly served with the two larger ones. But if you don't need (or don't like) the richness of bass in 896 and 886, the Vento 876 is a speaker that is outstanding in all respects."

The 876 intrigues me. I have an SVS PB12 sub and a Denon x4300 receiver.
Room size 18.5 ' L x 13'W x 9.5' H

1. any opinion on 896 v 876.
2. Will my denon x4300 receiver be able to drive either of these or will i need an amp (hoping not to buy an amp, if not needed)
3. Would you buy the Chrono SL tower instead of either of these two? (Price is not a factor).
4. Any other 5.1's you would consider (budget $5k).

Appreciate any responses
 
Last edited:
S

snakeeyes

Audioholic Ninja
I would think the 596.2 would be similar to the 896.

The 876 is much shorter and wouldn’t play as loud as the other 2. Not sure the size of your room though.

I have heard a couple comments from a few members here that the 896 is hard to drive but I don’t see that in the specs provided.

My 836 bookshelves (on LS300 stands) have less sensitivity and I drive them with my Yamaha 2060 with no issues. I crossover at 110hz to my Rythmik sub so towers would not be any improvement in my room which is not that big. 16x17. I also have the Chrono SL 556.2 center and 516.2 sides.

Good luck! :)
 
C

chemist323

Audioholic Intern
I would think the 596.2 would be similar to the 896.

The 876 is much shorter and wouldn’t play as loud as the other 2. Not sure the size of your room though.

I have heard a couple comments from a few members here that the 896 is hard to drive but I don’t see that in the specs provided.

My 836 bookshelves (on LS300 stands) have less sensitivity and I drive them with my Yamaha 2060 with no issues. I crossover at 110hz to my Rythmik sub so towers would not be any improvement in my room which is not that big. 16x17. I also have the Chrono SL 556.2 center and 516.2 sides.

Good luck! :)
Thanks snakeeyes. i actually did a mockup with some of the xmas boxes and the 876 does look small compared to the 896 and the sub (PB12). Your room is actually bigger than mine
 
Trell

Trell

Senior Audioholic
Kew, thanks for the info. I'm really looking into the Canton's, particularly the Vento 896 v the 876 on AC4L. Interestingly, i found a german review on Low beats with the following:
"The small Canton Vento 876 was the surprise in comparison. We already tested the flagship 896 in August 2016 and were more than pleased. Could there be more? Not quantitatively, of course, qualitatively. The liveliness, the balance and the beautiful precision with which the 876 reproduces all kinds of music makes it the most interesting Vento floor box for me.
Those who have large rooms, appreciate a lot of bass and high levels are perfectly served with the two larger ones. But if you don't need (or don't like) the richness of bass in 896 and 886, the Vento 876 is a speaker that is outstanding in all respects."

The 876 intrigues me. I have an SVS PB12 sub and a Denon x4300 receiver.
Room size 18.5 ' L x 13'W x 9.5' H

1. any opinion on 896 v 876.
2. Will my denon x4300 receiver be able to drive either of these or will i need an amp (hoping not to buy an amp, if not needed)
3. Would you buy the Chrono SL tower instead of either of these two? (Price is not a factor).
4. Any other 5.1's you would consider (budget $5k).

Appreciate any responses
My living room is 17.4' L x 11.5'W x 8.2'H and the Vento 876 predecessor Vento 870.2 is loud enough for me with subwoofer, Vento 820 (7" woofer) as surrounds and Vento 858.2 center using a Denon AVR-X4200W receiver. The 870.2 is a 2.5 way while the 876 is a 3 way speaker, but the number and size of drives are the same, as well as the cabinet size.

About a year ago I replaced the 870.2 with the Vento 886.2 that is bigger than the 870.2, and I think the 896.2 would be too physically imposing in my living room.

I like the curved shape of the Vento line and the speakers looks very nice in high gloss cherry finish, so no, I would not buy Chrono SL instead of Vento.

Below is a couple of Canton speaker measurements:

canton_vento_896.png


canton_vento_870_2.png
 
C

chemist323

Audioholic Intern
My living room is 17.4' L x 11.5'W x 8.2'H and the Vento 876 predecessor Vento 870.2 is loud enough for me with subwoofer, Vento 820 (7" woofer) as surrounds and Vento 858.2 center using a Denon AVR-X4200W receiver. The 870.2 is a 2.5 way while the 876 is a 3 way speaker, but the number and size of drives are the same, as well as the cabinet size.

About a year ago I replaced the 870.2 with the Vento 886.2 that is bigger than the 870.2, and I think the 896.2 would be too physically imposing in my living room.

I like the curved shape of the Vento line and the speakers looks very nice in high gloss cherry finish, so no, I would not buy Chrono SL instead of Vento.

Below is a couple of Canton speaker measurements:
TE]

Thank you Trell. Sounds like the Denon X4300 will be enough to supply the speakers. How big of a difference was the added woofer on the 886 vs the 870?
 
Last edited:
Trell

Trell

Senior Audioholic
Thank you Trell. Sounds like the Denon X4300 will be enough to supply the speakers. How big of a difference was the added subwoofer on the 886 vs the 870?
Probably not much, if any, difference since I do not recall anything particular about this for my listening habits in my room. I do use Audyssey XT32 and set the crossover at 80 Hz.

Edit: The Canton model numbers are confusing as the Vento 870 has 7" woofers while successor 870.2 has 6" woofers. The 886 and 886.2 have the same number and size of drivers as well both are 3-way speakers.
 
S

snakeeyes

Audioholic Ninja
Thanks snakeeyes. i actually did a mockup with some of the xmas boxes and the 876 does look small compared to the 896 and the sub (PB12). Your room is actually bigger than mine
Ya the real speakers will perform better than the mockup of Christmas boxes. LOL :)
 
Trell

Trell

Senior Audioholic
Thanks snakeeyes. i actually did a mockup with some of the xmas boxes and the 876 does look small compared to the 896 and the sub (PB12). Your room is actually bigger than mine
Doing mockups is a great idea!

By using the supplied spikes not totally screwed in, put on some metal (I got wooden floor) that has the Canton silicone pads attached you might get perhaps 1 inch more height like I did for my small Vento floorstander.

Below is the 876 and 896 in a group photo.

 
Trell

Trell

Senior Audioholic
...
Surveying Accessories4Less for the Chrono SL models that use the Ceramic tweeter gets:
Tower:
Chrono SL-596.2 @ $1280/pr (white only)
Bookshelf:
Chrono SL-536.2 @ $520/pr
Chrono SL-526.2 @ $440/pr (white only)
Center:
Chrono SL-556.2 @ $400/ea.
On-wall:
Chrono SL-516.2 @ $400/pr.
Most of the above indicate low stock, but I expect there will be more inventory arriving next year (I noticed these models listed as "Coming Soon" on the A4L site on 12/26/18). This year was the first that the version of the Chrono SL with this ceramic tweeter made it to the US/A4L!
...
The Chrono SL seems very nice! Below is measurement from a review last month of the Chrono SL 586.2 floorstander that is 3-way with 6" woofers and the ceramic tweeter. There currently are no Vento equivalent, but the older Vento 880.2 (same year model as my Vento 870.2) is similar: https://www.canton.de/en/archive/vento-880.2-dc

Edit: The title of the measurements does not match with the titles in the diagrams (Vento 896.2 DC), so some type of messing up has been done. From a another review the min impedance of Vento 896.2 is 4 Ohm at 390 Hz while here it is 3.1 Ohm.


canton_chrono_sl_586_2.png
 
Last edited:
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord

One thing to note here is that even though the 876 is the shortest, the tweeter appears to be positioned higher than any of the other towers!
 
Last edited:
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
1. any opinion on 896 v 876.
2. Will my denon x4300 receiver be able to drive either of these or will i need an amp (hoping not to buy an amp, if not needed)
3. Would you buy the Chrono SL tower instead of either of these two? (Price is not a factor).
4. Any other 5.1's you would consider (budget $5k).

Appreciate any responses
So sorry about the delayed response! I was bored somewhere and looked at AH on my phone. I saw your post and decided to wait until I got home to respond. Got home, went to AH and had other notifications and completely spaced your post!
Fortunately others (Trell and Snakeeyes) have covered for me!
1) I'm not sure you will notice a difference once you cross to a subwoofer!
2) I have used a 4400 for the bookshelf Vento and Chrono SL. They play cleanly as loud as I would ever play them! Given that towers are more efficient I think you'll be fine. It often seems counter-intuitive but larger speaker almost always will play louder at the same amount of watts. As a rule, towers can also handle more power, which many misinterpret as thinking they require more power because manufacturers have had some success attracting uninformed customers with advertising 300 watt speakers (as if that meant they were better or would play louder than 150W speakers)!
3) Given that the only Chrono SL tower (ceramic tweeter) that A4L currently has (I assume that is where you are buying) is the 596.2 with 8" woofers in white, I would let color and size decide. By size, I mean visually (if you did not use subs, then size would be more relevant for performance)! Obviously if you want a black speaker, you are not going with a Chrono SL because they are only available in white! So good that you did mockups. I would not hesitate to get the Chrono SL if white and the large size work for your room! Looking at extremes, a large speaker makes a statement that you are serious about audio to anyone visiting. A (good) small speaker can also make an impression with "big" sound coming from small boxes. Visually, the curved cabinet of the Vento makes them appear smaller than the equivalent Chrono SL.
4) Not really! If exclusively for HT (because I like the effect of good horns for HT) I might consider the JBL Studio 5 series while they are on sale for such bargain prices! But that is while keeping an eye to budget - the ceramic tweeter is good enough to compensate for the benefit of the horns and if you are using for music, it will be the better choice. Looking for a better speaker than the Cantons leads us to the DIY Philharmonic Audio BMR's sold by meniscus audio. Here is the kit of components:
I think there is a flat-pack available for the cabinet. I don't remember the total price, I'm thinking it was in teh $1300-$1400/pr range.
 
C

chemist323

Audioholic Intern
Doing mockups is a great idea!

By using the supplied spikes not totally screwed in, put on some metal (I got wooden floor) that has the Canton silicone pads attached you might get perhaps 1 inch more height like I did for my small Vento floorstander.

Below is the 876 and 896 in a group photo.
Thanks for the pic, here is my quick and dirty version of the mock up. It’s a simple pic for a simple man lol. On and disregard the mess. The boxes on the right are a bunch of mini bookshelf’s that I purchased to listen including psb alpha 3, focal domes, monitor radius 90, and one or two others. Initially I was upgrading ONLY my surrounds...lol
 

Attachments

Latest posts


newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top