Can you offer any comments in the differences in sound between the Vento 9.2 and the 820.2?
I hesitate to ask because I consider the 820.2 to be the point where diminishing returns starts to kick in pretty heavy. Canton's design consistency is good enough that I have no doubt that the Vento Reference are better, but I am not sure how much confidence you can have in differences without having an instant level-matched switch-over in the same room between them (and ideally, being double-blinded). But if there is something that stands out, let us know!
Outlaw receiver, Canton Vento Reference speakers and Hsu subs - that is one perfect little system (that can likely blast you out off the room - I'm sure those Reference drivers can take some power and put out)!
There is something about a high quality bookshelf 2.2 that appeals to me!
Probably mostly that had you gone with Vento Reference towers, it would have cost $6000 instead of $1500 for the pair of speakers, but you got that Vento Reference state of the art SQ (and it is hard to believe that the Vento Reference 3.2 would do better below 80Hz than the Hsu). How the tower compare with the bookshelfs above 80Hz is an ongoing debate, but I doubt you are kicking yourself over how the 9.2's play at 100Hz!
Curious, what happened with the Yamaha Stereo receiver? I always loved the look of those older units! Was it starting to show its age? or was it a weaker model? or did the Hsu's corrupt you such that you "... must... have...subwoofers" (receiver with bass management?
I think the biggest differences between 820 and 9.2 lyes with the cabinet size and the 9.2’s larger driver giving a more present mid bass due to the larger driver and slightly higher crossover point.
I’m not sure I could tell if it were just a difference in crossover tweaks and components if that happens to be where a large part of the difference lyes.
I tried both the 820’s and my 826’s out in the middle of the room and while they are as clear and concise, they just don’t seem to have the same presence of the larger 9.2’s.
Perhaps blindfolded this would be less the case but it’s how it seems to me.
Once I put the 820’s back on the dresser with the PM-7005 and listen to them, your point on the diminishing returns becomes blatantly apparent as I could be very happy if this simple 2.0 setup were the one and only I could afford.
I’d be real curious in the differences between this 9.2 & Ref 9k, now that is a huge jump in cost far beyond my comfort level.
Until incorporating the dual HSU’s I’d been very happy with my 2.0 setups. Now I’m not sure I could go completely back to that.
I have listened to the 9.2’s on their own without bass management turned on and while they put out good low end in full range mode, no speaker I’ve ever owned or likely will can go as low and controlled as those two subwoofers.
The Outlaw receiver serves very well as a single box solution for my needs. I will however be adding a pair of Outlaw 2220 mono blocks to this system as I think these speakers will benefit from the additional headroom. My listening volumes are pretty sedate but believe I could overdrive the 2160 driving these 9.2’s if not careful.
The Yamaha was just a receiver I really liked the looks of and it sounded pretty good as well. At this point though it needs a new transformer and if going to the expense and trouble of doing that, I would just do a full refresh. So it will sit for awhile as I put the funds towards one of Outlaws 5 channel amps and the two mono blocks for the 2.2 setup.
