matt49
Well-known member
Sorry to keep you waiting, gents, but I have to watch the cricket highlights and then have my supper. (Some things are more important than hifi.) I'll be online later this evening.
:cheers:
Matt
:cheers:
Matt
DocG said:Sorry, I'm from the Continent...
Cricket as explained to a foreigner:
"You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
There are two men called Umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in, are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game."
Exciting, innit!
:twisted:
CnoEvil said:DocG said:Sorry, I'm from the Continent...
Cricket as explained to a foreigner:
"You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
There are two men called Umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in, are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game."
Exciting, innit!
:twisted:
That's even more complicated than football (men running for a ball, and when they get it, kick it away again).
matt49
Well-known member
So today I had a first listen to the Devialet 170. The source was a Copland CDA825. Having decided that the Harbeth Super HL5s are just a bit too bulky for my room, I asked to listen to the Monitor 30.1s. The dealer also suggested trying the (now discontinued) Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor Ms.
The first thing is to say that with both pairs of speakers the Dev sounded immaculately transparent. As I said about the D-Premier, it’s hard to find anything negative to say about the Dev. The sound is just so extraordinarily clean. The instruments appear out of and disappear back into complete silence. Every note is articulated precisely, with the crispest leading edges and really long decay. All of this -- and it’s especially noticeable with higher frequencies -- is as smooth as glass. In that respect the Devialet could have been a Class A amp. Its 3D imaging is also outstanding.
First up were the SFs. They have a very sweet tone at the top end. Really gorgeous. The bass is tight and fast and goes quite deep for boxes of this size. What they did especially well, I felt, was opening up complex music. I threw some pretty tricky stuff at them, and they didn’t disappoint. In comparison the Harbeths sounded both a bit pedestrian and slightly closed in. The SFs gave no sense of being boxes, whilst the Harbeths did. By ‘pedestrian’ I mean that the Harbeths sounded slower and had a duller top end. (I think the Super HL5s, with their super-tweeter, are an altogether different proposition.) Having said that, the imaging of the Harbeths was excellent.
Conclusions? I doubt if you could get a cigarette paper between the Dev 170 and 240, or at least not with speakers of this size/sensitivity. The 170 has bags of power and never sounded remotely stretched. The overall SQ is marvellous. I’ve been critical of the Harbeths, but the SFs are stiff competition. The Devialet-SF combination is a real winner, supremely sweet and musical. My best demo so far.
:cheers:
Matt
The first thing is to say that with both pairs of speakers the Dev sounded immaculately transparent. As I said about the D-Premier, it’s hard to find anything negative to say about the Dev. The sound is just so extraordinarily clean. The instruments appear out of and disappear back into complete silence. Every note is articulated precisely, with the crispest leading edges and really long decay. All of this -- and it’s especially noticeable with higher frequencies -- is as smooth as glass. In that respect the Devialet could have been a Class A amp. Its 3D imaging is also outstanding.
First up were the SFs. They have a very sweet tone at the top end. Really gorgeous. The bass is tight and fast and goes quite deep for boxes of this size. What they did especially well, I felt, was opening up complex music. I threw some pretty tricky stuff at them, and they didn’t disappoint. In comparison the Harbeths sounded both a bit pedestrian and slightly closed in. The SFs gave no sense of being boxes, whilst the Harbeths did. By ‘pedestrian’ I mean that the Harbeths sounded slower and had a duller top end. (I think the Super HL5s, with their super-tweeter, are an altogether different proposition.) Having said that, the imaging of the Harbeths was excellent.
Conclusions? I doubt if you could get a cigarette paper between the Dev 170 and 240, or at least not with speakers of this size/sensitivity. The 170 has bags of power and never sounded remotely stretched. The overall SQ is marvellous. I’ve been critical of the Harbeths, but the SFs are stiff competition. The Devialet-SF combination is a real winner, supremely sweet and musical. My best demo so far.
:cheers:
Matt
WishTree
Well-known member
matt49 said:
That is very encouraging.
IMO. If you can get the sound of a Class A amp, without a Class A amp, then that is what you should do......though it pains me to say so.
I look forward to seeing if the 35i is still a threat.....but you will have to hear them side by side (with the same source).
BTW. What cables were being used?
Macspur
Well-known member
Hi Matt,
Thanks for another very good review.
If I were ever to change the SHL5's, SF is a brand that does interest me... how would you say the Cremona Auditor M compares?
So is the plan now, to do a side by side demo of MF and the new Devialet?
Mac
Thanks for another very good review.
If I were ever to change the SHL5's, SF is a brand that does interest me... how would you say the Cremona Auditor M compares?
So is the plan now, to do a side by side demo of MF and the new Devialet?
Mac
matt49
Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
I'm afraid I didn't take note of the cables. :doh: I'll see if I can find out.
I will increase your pain a little by mentioning two areas where the Dev is streets ahead of the AMS35i. Need I say "remote control"? ... And then there are the looks. I don't think I'm being unkind if I say that the AMS35i is as plain as a great big plain thing. The Dev may be shaped like a pizza box, but it's the sort of pizza box that Mrs Posh Spice would eat a pizza from (if she ate pizza ... or indeed anything at all). And then there's the configurability. And the onboard DAC. ...
I hope to do the side-by-side demo next week, assuming my local dealer has received his Devs before I head off on holiday for the whole of August.
:cheers:
Matt
matt49
Well-known member
matt49
Well-known member
Macspur said:
Thanks, Mac.
It felt a bit odd writing about the Dev 170; it's so transparent there's not a great deal you can say about it. I hope I managed to convey some sense of the experience.
Sonus Fabers are a very different experience from Harbeths. I haven't compared the SHL5s directly with SFs, so this comes with a pinch of salt, but I think there are four things I'd say. First, the tonal balance is different. The Harbeths are probably tilted more towards the mid- and upper-midrange, whereas the SFs have more brilliance. Normally I'd prefer the former, as too much top end can be tiring, but the transparency of the Dev made the SFs very calm. Obviously you'll get more bass out of the SHL5s than the relatively small Cremonas, which are only 35 x 20 x 37, compared to the 60 x 30 x 30 SHL5s. Second, for all their lovely airiness, the Harbeths are still square boxes, and you do get a little hint of that boxiness, which the SFs don't have. Third, based on my demo yesterday I'd say that the 2D imaging of the Harbeths is slightly better. It's a fine call though. Fourth, whilst you lose something in terms of the width of soundstage, I think small standmounts tend to sound faster and to have more integrity. The sound is coming from a smaller point and has more coherence.
When the Cremonas first came out they were the same price as the SHL5s. Since then, SF prices have gone a bit crazy. As the Cremona Auditors are now being replaced, there are deals for ex-demo stock, but you'll still pay at least £1K more for them than for the SHL5s. On the other hand, they do sound like a very expensive speaker.
:cheers:
Matt
Macspur
Well-known member
matt49 said:
Thanks for that Matt.
Just been reading up on the SF and see they are rear ported, so not sure they would work in my small room and yes even ex dem prices are a touch OTT... still, when the time comes, they will certainly be a speaker on the demo list.
The Devialet, from what you describe, does sound like a superb piece of kit, must try and hear one for myself some time.
Cheers
Mac
WishTree
Well-known member
matt49 said:
Hi Matt.. If I may, I would also suggest you to have a possible demo of Vivid Audio V1.5 (or any other V series in your preferred format book shelf / wall mount) !
Few years back, the looks of these speakers was an issue to some, but I guess now many are accustomed to their physical appearance and comfortable the way they look
Over these years of HiFi, I belieive Speakers have the most pronounced impact as you know already and if Vivid Audio is not too much stretch money wise (if not immediately) even for near future, then it is worth an audition.
Devialet and Vivid partner alot and it seems an active version of Vivid Gaya is in pipe line with Devialet as the amplifier.
CnoEvil said:
Let's rub it in! A picture says more than a thousand words... :twisted:
And of course also:
matt49
Well-known member
DocG said:Let's rub it in! A picture says more than a thousand words... :twisted:
And of course also:
Now that's just cruel, Doc. I think you may be in danger of breaking the Hippocratic oath there.
matt49
Well-known member
WishTree said:Hi Matt.. If I may, I would also suggest you to have a possible demo of Vivid Audio V1.5 (or any other V series in your preferred format book shelf / wall mount) !
Few years back, the looks of these speakers was an issue to some, but I guess now many are accustomed to their physical appearance and comfortable the way they look
Over these years of HiFi, I belieive Speakers have the most pronounced impact as you know already and if Vivid Audio is not too much stretch money wise (if not immediately) even for near future, then it is worth an audition.
Devialet and Vivid partner alot and it seems an active version of Vivid Gaya is in pipe line with Devialet as the amplifier.
I know there's quite a buzz about these speakers. I just had another look at them. Hmmm, not sure at all whether I could live with the sci-fi look in my living room.
Talking of actives with Devialet, I guess the 240 will at some stage be configurable to operate with its own internal crossover. Interesting.
matt49
Well-known member
Here's a new review of the 170 from Absolute Sounds.
http://www.absolutesounds.com/pdf/main/press/2013_09_HFN_D-170.pdf
Matt
http://www.absolutesounds.com/pdf/main/press/2013_09_HFN_D-170.pdf
Matt
matt49 said:DocG said:Let's rub it in! A picture says more than a thousand words... :twisted:
And of course also:
Now that's just cruel, Doc. I think you may be in danger of breaking the Hippocratic oath there.
Ah come on, Matt! For once I can be evil towards Cno... :twisted:
DocG said:CnoEvil said:DocG said:
I heard that!
Say what, HearnoEvil?
:silenced: (SpeakNoEvil)
matt49
Well-known member
This afternoon I demoed the Devialet 170 again. Same set-up as last time, Copland CDA825 and Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor Ms. One difference though: after the previous demo of this set-up I realized I hadn't checked how the Copland and the Dev were connected. I'd assumed the dealer would use the digital outs of the Copland. So I called the dealer to check, and it turned out he'd been using the analogue RCA connection.
Detail, detail ...
So this time the Copland was serving as transport only. Results? Well, the 170 continues to be awesomely brilliant. It's just so delicate and pure. I imagine some people might think it a tad cold or even thin. I don't think it has quite the bass clout of the AMS35i; on the other hand it seems to me to have a fraction more precision all round. To me it just sounds present, tangibly real.
So, job done.
On the subject of the AMS35i, my local dealer was supposed tro be getting the Devs in, which would have allowed me to do a direct , but there's no sign. Due to holidays, that's now not going to happen until the end of August. In fact, it's not going to happen at all.
Both the Dev and the AMS35i are superb. If my memory serves me right, and allowing for different set-ups and listening environments, the Dev has a slight edge in terms of sheer transparency. But in terms of SQ there's not much between them.
Two other factors weigh heavily with me. One is appearance: much as I like to look at hi-fi boxes (for instance, I love the look of Accuphase kit), the AMS35i is very big and rather plain. By comparison the Dev is unobtrusively beautiful. And then there's the remote. The Dev's remote is just perfection: solid, well-crafted, elegant, and works like a dream. I won't comment on the AMS35i's remote again, for fear of upsetting Cno.
So the deal is done. End of story. I totted up last night how many amps/active speakers I've demoed. The total stands at 27.
The Dev 170 is the one.
Next stop, speakers ...
Detail, detail ...
So this time the Copland was serving as transport only. Results? Well, the 170 continues to be awesomely brilliant. It's just so delicate and pure. I imagine some people might think it a tad cold or even thin. I don't think it has quite the bass clout of the AMS35i; on the other hand it seems to me to have a fraction more precision all round. To me it just sounds present, tangibly real.
So, job done.
On the subject of the AMS35i, my local dealer was supposed tro be getting the Devs in, which would have allowed me to do a direct , but there's no sign. Due to holidays, that's now not going to happen until the end of August. In fact, it's not going to happen at all.
Both the Dev and the AMS35i are superb. If my memory serves me right, and allowing for different set-ups and listening environments, the Dev has a slight edge in terms of sheer transparency. But in terms of SQ there's not much between them.
Two other factors weigh heavily with me. One is appearance: much as I like to look at hi-fi boxes (for instance, I love the look of Accuphase kit), the AMS35i is very big and rather plain. By comparison the Dev is unobtrusively beautiful. And then there's the remote. The Dev's remote is just perfection: solid, well-crafted, elegant, and works like a dream. I won't comment on the AMS35i's remote again, for fear of upsetting Cno.
So the deal is done. End of story. I totted up last night how many amps/active speakers I've demoed. The total stands at 27.
The Dev 170 is the one.
Next stop, speakers ...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram