B&W 684 best for rock?

[peterpan]

I find that many expensive speakers bright and to hell for my music ( Deep purple, Hammerfall, Nirvana, Live, Metallica). I know; most rock cd's are poor recording. But i like a warmer sound without brightness and bright highes.

So is a cheaper system than better? And is the B&W 684 a good choice?

This weekend i have heard a NAIM XS, Naim 5i with Spendor A6. With my music it was very worse!

 

[matthewpiano]

Try NAD C545BEE, NAD C355BEE and the B&W 684s. I think you'll probably find that combination better suited to your tastes.

Also, what do you have at the moment? What do you like about it, and what are you looking to gain with your investment? This will help to give us all a point of reference.

 

[Lost Angeles]

I think my 684s definately rock, but you need to demo. Take your amp and CDP + some discs with you.
If you've read the Roksan post on here you will reallise that you definately need to demo.
RS6s also worth listening too.

 

[peterpan]

NAD sounds good, but very bad quality. What about the Marantz 8003 amp and cd and the B&W 684?

 

[matthewpiano]

peterpan:NAD sounds good, but very bad quality. What about the Marantz 8003 amp and cd and the B&W 684?

Bad quality???? NAD????

 

[SteveR750]

I'm surprised you found the Spendor's bright...I too listen predominantly over processed rick music devoid of any natural ambience and wince at a harsh grainy sound the Spendors are noted for their smooth natural sound to the point of being a little underwhelming perhaps. Also, what do you mea by NAD = bad quality? Quality of sound or construction? In my experience, NAD equipment has a lovely warm sound that is not at all fatigueing and is as well built as anything else at its price point. I had a 3130 for 20 odd years and it worked faultlessly.

 

[peterpan]

The quality of construction is very bad. The sound is good. I think Marantz is a better construction. Also the 8003?

 

[matthewpiano]

peterpan:The quality of construction is very bad. The sound is good. I think Marantz is a better construction. Also the 8003?

On what evidence? NAD stuff might not look as impressive on the outside but all the money goes into quality components inside. Nothing wrong with NAD's build quality at all.

I've not heard the Marantz so can't comment.

 

[manicm]

I've heard the MA RS6s, and they're brilliant - and this was a cd playing on a Denon ht and dvd player. Was Radiohead In Rainbows, couldn't believe my ears how good the sound was.