Energy Connoisseur C-3, Onix X-LS, SVS SBS-01, etc.

[warpdrive]

The Energy's aim for a very natural sound, they are neither bright nor dull. For most people who are used to speakers that have a more forward or dynamic sound, they may sound a bit too polite, or too safe.

I find the Paradigms Monitors a bit brighter, and looser in the bass, with a tad drier sound to them.

I haven't heard the other speakers mentioned, but for those who want an accurate natural speaker, the C-3 is a great choice.

 

[Duffman-OOHYEAH]

I wish I did, I'm in Indiana. What's your personal take on the combo you have there? B

If you head over to www.av123forum.com you may find someone in your area that has them.

My take on the x-ls + subs is they offer a WHOLE LOTTA sound for the money. While they're not the end all hifi speaker they do what they do amazingly well. When I 1st received them I did a little comparo with my Rocket 550's just for fun.

The x-ls delivers a HUGE sound stage with magnificent imaging that envelops the listener and brings the musician right into the room albeit the 550 does this better with more transparency + detail but then again it is 5x the price, it should. Where some people will have a problem with these is if they're used to bright or forward speakers. The x-ls's are neutral with the highs being a bit recessed (still detailed but with no bite) which alot of people thoroughly enjoy because it doesn't fatigue the ear.

The first thing my girlfriend and I said when we played the last of the mohecians soundtrack after setting these up for the 1st audition was "WOW"! Everything played so smooth and detailed that we were floored. Instruments sounded exactly like they would if you sat in the front row of an orchestra. These rock, anyone would love what the x-ls's are capable of and for 199 that just tops the cake .

As for the xsub, I run twins that are corner loaded and they drop some major ba ba ba bass! They will hit down to around 22hz -6dbish with room/floor shaking ability into the high teens (around 16hz). They won't slam you in the chest (then again what 8"er's will) but 2 of these hit harder then my old jbl 12" e250p which is rated at 550 watt max output. They articualte music as well as their brothern in the rocket family which has been stated by some. But if you're looking for a ht only sub go with svs or other companies offerings OR you could wait for the bigger xsub to be released "soon"-hopefully. It will be a 12" ported beast that will plunge into the teens easily. Cost should be between $499-599.

Hope this helps, feel free to PM me if you want to chat about more details.

JR

 

[SKINNER]

Yeah, it's a tough decision. . .the XLS's are $199 but the C-3's can be had for $249. . .also, I'm not too sure how I feel about the X-sub's 8" woofer.

 

[Duffman-OOHYEAH]

Yeah, it's a tough decision. . .the XLS's are $199 but the C-3's can be had for $249. . .also, I'm not too sure how I feel about the X-sub's 8" woofer.

I'm sure you already know this but you don't have to get a sub from the same company that you purchase the other speakers. With that said the x-sub is pretty amazing for it's size and $. Then again so is the pb10. If you want the goods for music & ht then get 1 - 2 x-subs if you're mostly geared towards ht then a bigger sub would be better. If you care about the looks of your system (some do, some don't) NO ONE does it better then Onix. As for the C-3's I would put money on the fact that the x-ls's will sound better, I know Mark Schifter and Danny Richie put ALOT into these and could've easily have charged more but wanted to hit a nitch in the market with the <200$ crowd.

JR

 

[Sheep]

As for the C-3's I would put money on the fact that the x-ls's will sound better, I know Mark Schifter and Danny Richie put ALOT into these and could've easily have charged more but wanted to hit a nitch in the market with the <200$ crowd.

JR

I don't know about that. The C-3's are just as flat and went through rigorous testing at the NRC.

SheepStar

 

[Duffman-OOHYEAH]

Sheep I know your setup consists of energys and I mean no disrespect, they make a fine product. Just being the betting man I am, I would put my money on Onix if these speakers were in a head 2 head as I'm sure you would go with your brand.


JR

 

[Sheep]

Well, lets have a look see.

C-3

Blue = X-Ls

Looks pretty even to me.

SheepStar

 

[soundhound]

right now i'm comparing the C-3s to the axiom M3tis. the energies have them beat for classical music hands down. no contest at all. i didn't listen to any jazz yet, but acoustic music seems to sound better on the energies (demoed some david grisman, pat metheny, and bob dylan, plus the orchestral stuff), so i'm guessing that they would also win for most jazz. voices are definitely also clearer and more distinct on the energies. on other things it is a little closer, with the axioms actually sounding better on a couple things, but i won't have a chance to do more serious testing for another day or two. i'm also possibly getting a set of PSB B25s from a local dealer sometime in the next few days to throw into the mix. i'm really looking forward to hearing those.

 

[silversurfer]

From my listening, the M3Ti is outclassed by the 170 and C3. The C3 having a bit more bass extension than the 170, but the 170 seemed to be cleaner through the mids(this was the "classic" 170). I have not heard the XL-S yet, but over on AVS there are a couple of people that have compared it with the 170SE and thought the Ascend was a better sounding speaker. A search should find the comparisons over there.

 

[Sheep]

From my listening, the M3Ti is outclassed by the 170 and C3. The C3 having a bit more bass extension than the 170, but the 170 seemed to be cleaner through the mids(this was the "classic" 170). I have not heard the XL-S yet, but over on AVS there are a couple of people that have compared it with the 170SE and thought the Ascend was a better sounding speaker. A search should find the comparisons over there.

I've also heard that. Good to see your adding something instead of arguing

SheepStar

 

[silversurfer]

I've also heard that. Good to see your adding something instead of arguing

hehehe...it is only arguing because you have a differing opinion.

 

[corey]

My current HT uses Klipsch RF35 towers, RC35 center and, RS 35 surrounds.... I'm planning on setting up my own listening studio to just kick back in and relax.

I'd kick back & relax with your Klipsch.

 

[j_garcia]

From my listening, the M3Ti is outclassed by the 170 and C3. The C3 having a bit more bass extension than the 170, but the 170 seemed to be cleaner through the mids(this was the "classic" 170). I have not heard the XL-S yet, but over on AVS there are a couple of people that have compared it with the 170SE and thought the Ascend was a better sounding speaker. A search should find the comparisons over there.

Looking at the specs, that's what I would expect between the X-LS and 170SE. The 170 definitely outclassed the M3 to my ears also, and though not a fan of them, I'd have to say the C3 is better overall than the M3 as well.

 

[SKINNER]

I'd kick back & relax with your Klipsch.

Don't get me wrong, I do. But this setup will be in an entirely different room. Not to mention, the Klipsch's can be a bit brash with some materials.

 

[Sheep]

Don't get me wrong, I do. But this setup will be in an entirely different room. Not to mention, the Klipsch's can be a bit brash with some materials.

Brash! Hey, a new way to describe Klipsches!

SheepStar

 

[silversurfer]

Looking at the specs, that's what I would expect between the X-LS and 170SE. The 170 definitely outclassed the M3 to my ears also, and though not a fan of them, I'd have to say the C3 is better overall than the M3 as well.

What in particular about the C3 did you find not to your liking?

 

[SKINNER]

What in particular about the C3 did you find not to your liking?

Yes, please explain....

 

[silversurfer]

Yes, please explain....

Compared to the CBM-170's, I know what I thought of the C3's....the mids seemed to be cleaner/better to me on the 170's. I was wondering if j_garcia thought the same thing.

 

[j_garcia]

The midrange doesn't have the clarity that I want. That is what makes the Ascends and the GRs so pleasing to me - the mids are very detailed and very natural sounding; especially with vocals. With Paradigm's Minis and Montor 5s (which I used to own), the mids were there, but they were not quite so "life like" for lack of a better term, and the C3s have a similar quality. I didn't expect them to be better; they are what they are, just like the Monitor 5s were. Neither really impressed me with music. I like speakers that have articulate yet smooth midrange that has some depth to it. That's not so easy to come by in the typical lower cost speakers, which is why the 170s are so impressive.

 

[soundhound]

j_garcia, would you say the mids on the ascends are more pronounced or forward than the C-3s, or just more detailed and clear?