"Ceramic" tweeter - Canton Vento 820.2 vs Paradigm S2

[KEW]

Well, I'm coming to the conclusion that Canton Specifications are a bit of a cluster!
I told you the Vento Ref 9.2 DC was not the good tweeter, but I am also reading it is Aluminum ceramic oxide. I doubt the "good" tweeter is pure ceramic and the Vento Reference 9.0 DC had an Aluminum Manganese tweeter. On my 820.2, the tweeter is described simply as Ceramic, but it would not surprise me if it is actually Aluminum ceramic oxide.
In any case I just removed my tweeter and it has a paper adhesive label that reads "Art-Nr.: 17671"...and after I removed the tweeter, I saw the port is in-line and I could have just shined a light in the port and read the number from the back!
Hopefully you have the good one (or a good one)!
I'm not sure how relevant the number is. If you have the same number, I think it is safe to assume you have the same tweeter, but if yours is different, I'm not positive it would not still be the same technology.
One reason I say this is the crossover board is labeled as follows:
Crossover
Vento 820.2
Art-Nr.: 17673
Since there is only a difference of two between the tweeter and the crossover, it would not surprise me if the woofer was Art-Nr.:17672, but it is a reasonable bet that your crossover with a 7" woofer is not the same as mine with a 6" woofer (and labeled "Vento 820.2"). I guess I am saying I am not certain that this number is a unique part number assigned at the point of manufacture or if the label is stuck on when they inventory and assign parts for a manufacturing batch of a specific model of speaker!

Edit: I hope that ramble makes some sense - I know what I was saying!
...and it is not a timid tweeter, but I consider it very realistic!

 

[ematthews]

Well, I’m not tied to them for 30 days. If they end up not working, then back they go. But for now, I’m kinda enjoying them a bit.

 

[snakeeyes]

I’m also curious about the new Paradigm Premier series even though they are not beryllium.

 

[ematthews]

Well, I'm coming to the conclusion that Canton Specifications are a bit of a cluster!
I told you the Vento Ref 9.2 DC was not the good tweeter, but I am also reading it is Aluminum ceramic oxide. I doubt the "good" tweeter is pure ceramic and the Vento Reference 9.0 DC had an Aluminum Manganese tweeter. On my 820.2, the tweeter is described simply as Ceramic, but it would not surprise me if it is actually Aluminum ceramic oxide.
In any case I just removed my tweeter and it has a paper adhesive label that reads "Art-Nr.: 17671"...and after I removed the tweeter, I saw the port is in-line and I could have just shined a light in the port and read the number from the back!
Hopefully you have the good one (or a good one)!
I'm not sure how relevant the number is. If you have the same number, I think it is safe to assume you have the same tweeter, but if yours is different, I'm not positive it would not still be the same technology.
One reason I say this is the crossover board is labeled as follows:
Crossover
Vento 820.2
Art-Nr.: 17673
Since there is only a difference of two between the tweeter and the crossover, it would not surprise me if the woofer was Art-Nr.:17672, but it is a reasonable bet that your crossover with a 7" woofer is not the same as mine with a 6" woofer (and labeled "Vento 820.2"). I guess I am saying I am not certain that this number is a unique part number assigned at the point of manufacture or if the label is stuck on when they inventory and assign parts for a manufacturing batch of a specific model of speaker!

Edit: I hope that ramble makes some sense - I know what I was saying!
...and it is not a timid tweeter, but I consider it very realistic!

I will tell you this. These are the largest sounding bookshelf speakers I have ever listened to. They sound like towers. In fact have more low end than my Ascend Towers. The highs do sound a little congested, but I think everything might compared to my LS50's

 

[snakeeyes]

I will tell you this. These are the largest sounding bookshelf speakers I have ever listened to. They sound like towers. In fact have more low end than my Ascend Towers. The highs do sound a little congested, but I think everything might compared to my LS50's

I wonder how Canton Vento 890.2 towers would compare to your old towers. Those are on sale.

 

[ematthews]

I wonder how Canton Vento 890.2 towers would compare to your old towers. Those are on sale.

I saw these when I purchased the Reference series bookshelf. With an additional 10% off these Canton's are a great deal. If the bookshelf congestion settles down they will be fantastic.

 

[snakeeyes]

I saw these when I purchased the Reference series bookshelf. With an additional 10% off these Canton's are a great deal. If the bookshelf congestion settles down they will be fantastic.

Cool. Ya I like the look without the grills on the cantons.

 

[KEW]

Glad to see you are doing this right and getting the speakers in-house and giving them a little time.
I spent a little time further researching these speakers and it looks like the Vento Reference 9.2 DC is a later generation speaker like the 820.2.
Furthermore, since the retail price is 2.66 times that of the Vento 820.2 I believe (but do not know for certain) that the 9.2 probably has a better (per Canton) tweeter than the 820.2.
One thing that impressed me when I compared the Vento 820.2 to the Chrono 502.2 was the way that no specific aspect of the Vento was dramatically better, but every aspect was incrementally better. Accordingly, I am inclined to believe that Canton has a well developed design approach and knows how to spend the extra budget to get good results.
Keep us posted on your 9.2's!

 

[ematthews]

Will do. As mentioned above the congestion or lack of instrument seperation is my only concern. It's minor..I am not sure that will open up a bit over time. I've not had this issue on my other speakers. But comparing anything to the LS50 may have this issue now. The Kef really stands out in this area. I will keep the Canton's a few more weeks and see how it goes.

 

[ematthews]

Well, I'm coming to the conclusion that Canton Specifications are a bit of a cluster!
I told you the Vento Ref 9.2 DC was not the good tweeter, but I am also reading it is Aluminum ceramic oxide. I doubt the "good" tweeter is pure ceramic and the Vento Reference 9.0 DC had an Aluminum Manganese tweeter. On my 820.2, the tweeter is described simply as Ceramic, but it would not surprise me if it is actually Aluminum ceramic oxide.
In any case I just removed my tweeter and it has a paper adhesive label that reads "Art-Nr.: 17671"...and after I removed the tweeter, I saw the port is in-line and I could have just shined a light in the port and read the number from the back!
Hopefully you have the good one (or a good one)!
I'm not sure how relevant the number is. If you have the same number, I think it is safe to assume you have the same tweeter, but if yours is different, I'm not positive it would not still be the same technology.
One reason I say this is the crossover board is labeled as follows:
Crossover
Vento 820.2
Art-Nr.: 17673
Since there is only a difference of two between the tweeter and the crossover, it would not surprise me if the woofer was Art-Nr.:17672, but it is a reasonable bet that your crossover with a 7" woofer is not the same as mine with a 6" woofer (and labeled "Vento 820.2"). I guess I am saying I am not certain that this number is a unique part number assigned at the point of manufacture or if the label is stuck on when they inventory and assign parts for a manufacturing batch of a specific model of speaker!

Edit: I hope that ramble makes some sense - I know what I was saying!
...and it is not a timid tweeter, but I consider it very realistic!

Hey. My Tweeter has an art # 16763.

 

[KEW]

Hey. My Tweeter has an art # 16763.

Oh well, nothing to be gleaned from that. Thanks for checking!

 

[ematthews]

Been listening more today. Really a full range speaker. I’m impressed already they can only get better with a bit more time. These in a tower would be outstanding!!

 

[KEW]

Been listening more today. Really a full range speaker. I’m impressed already they can only get better with a bit more time. These in a tower would be outstanding!!

Is the congestion opening up? Have you compared them to anything other than the LS50's on that count?

 

[ematthews]

A little. I did a back and forth with my Revel F208. And to be honest. I think I prefer the brighter sound in the upper register of the Cantons. The Kef has better imaging than both but is more forward as well. I am returning my Revels and not sure what tower I will go with.

 

[KEW]

A little. I did a back and forth with my Revel F208. And to be honest. I think I prefer the brighter sound in the upper register of the Cantons.

I think yours is a different tweeter, but I suspect Canton has a sound character they strive for and they share characteristics, so I will say it again...

...and it is not a timid tweeter, but I consider it very realistic!

So you have two pairs of bookshelf speakers and the RBH towers.
Is your ultimate goal to end up with one pair of towers and one pair of bookshelf's?
Did you get the Cantons as a means to check out Canton's Vento (tower) without the risk of higher costs (esp. return shipping costs)?

Honestly, I don't think any normal non-coaxial speaker can compete with a coaxial speaker for imaging. It is pretty neat how even at 10 feet away our ears easily detect the difference between coaxial and 6" between tweeter & mid!

 

[ematthews]

So. Another day and these Cantons are getting even better. This could be a big problem as they could beat all my other speakers out of getting any time. These dig so deep. Amazing, but they are large deep cabinets. No sub either. I have been listening to mostly ambient space post modern music. So that adds to the large 3D sound stage. I called A4L and the matching stands for these are 800

 

[ematthews]

 

[KEW]

So. Another day and these Cantons are getting even better. This could be a big problem as they could beat all my other speakers out of getting any time. These dig so deep. Amazing, but they are large deep cabinets. No sub either. I have been listening to mostly ambient space post modern music. So that adds to the large 3D sound stage. I called A4L and the matching stands for these are 800

Happy to hear these are sounding so good!
$800 for speaker stands? Ouch! I guess some of that is the difference between special order vs clearance items.

 

[snakeeyes]

I’m curious on some of the Canton towers but only at clearance prices. I’m also willing to wait a couple months.

 

[ematthews]

I’m curious on some of the Canton towers but only at clearance prices. I’m also willing to wait a couple months.

A4L could be sold out by then. 30 day returns. Take a chance as I did and you may be blown away. I got the Vento Reference DC version 2.