Looking for advice re. new speakers for Rotel 1520 ( B&W 684, RX6, etc.)

[admin_exported]

I recently replaced my Rotel RA-06 with a 1520 which has certainly breathed new life into my setup. However there is still a noticeable restraint/ politeness when playing faster music so I'm looking to replace my Focal 714Vs as well and was wondering if anyone could advise me which floorstanders I should audition? I'm looking for something around the £700 mark.

I'm currently having to play at low-ish volumes and with the speakers approx. 12" from a back wall. Overall, I've been happy enough with the general rich character and sweet treble of the Focal sound and wouldn't want to trade this off with the new speakers if at all possible- I just want to achieve a bit more 'punch'.

After having a quick look at some previous posts, I've noted two possibilities: B&W 684s and MA RX6s. Apparently the B&Ws make a particularly good match as they share components with Rotel? But I've also read that the 684s can come across a little muddled at lower volumes. Perhaps the power and sheer brio of the 1520 will help to overcome this though? I believe that the B&Ws are also supplied with bungs for the bass ports, so that might help with the positioning issues as well.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Rotel 1520......Arcam CD73T......Pro-ject RPM4......Focal 714V......Chord Odyssey 2 speaker cable.

 

[Blackdawn]

you could add missions mx5 to the list

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks, they sound like a good pair of speakers. The dimensions are a bit large for my small room but apparently they're designed to be placed near walls which for me is a big plus.

I've had a quick check online though and it looks like my local audio-T doesn't stock them.

 

[Anonymous]

The Rotal RA1520 amp is superb and it'll drive the B&W 684's and M/A RX6's superbly

I've heard both and they're great speakers; the RX6's for me are just that bit better as theyre punchier but with more taut, well timed bass in comparison to the 684's (but only just).

Another speaker worth considering (if you can demo them) are the QUAD 22L2's. Available at a superb price currently and they sound fantastic (look stunning in piano black as well

For me it'd be a toss up between the M/A's and the QUAD's... You've already got a great amp & CDP as well as good cable... Let us know how you get on

 

[Anonymous]

I've just seen a couple of reviews that suggest the Quad 22L2s are something special- Intriguing! They're still a bit pricey at audio-T, but nevertheless they do sound worthy of a demo. Thanks for the tip!

 

[ear]

the 22 L2 are simply amazing.you can find some videos on the internet of them playing

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks, I'll certainly take a look at those videos.

Would you happen to know how well the 22L2s perform when positioned near back walls, and are they supplied with foam bungs by any chance?

 

[Anonymous]

Hi there,

I'd certainly give a big thumbs up to the B&W 684's, (although I've never heard the other speakers in question).

I listen to a very wide range of music, from John Williams film scores to Timbaland, Usher etc, and I'm very impressed.

I don't find low volumes a problem, as such, but they do sound great with a bit of oomph!!!

Wouldn't even think of changing them for many, many years to come.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks! To be honest the 684s were front runners for me from the outset. Just out of interest, have you tried the various bung configurations at all? If so, have you had a chance to explore how effective they are at neutralising boomy bass in confined spaces?

 

[Anonymous]

Hi ChesterG,

I now have them with over a foot of free space around them so don't need the bungs. Before I moved they were closer to other items in the room and the bungs did come in useful to control the bass.

The bungs are very versatile though so lots of adjustments you can make.

The supplied plinth and spikes are ideal and, on my wooden floor, a few sets of Atacama floor spike protectors have worked wonders.

They're are also excellent if you choose to integrate them into a home cinema setup.

I've also bi-amped mine to give them the best signal.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the info! I'm glad to hear that the B&W bungs allow you to modify the bass- With my old AE Evo 3s it was either bungs in or bungs out, and that was it. More flexibility would've been handy.

 

[Anonymous]

I've just come back from the auditions at Audio-T in Swansea where I listened to B&W 684s, RX6s and KEF Q500s. They didn't have a demo Rotel 1520 (and I didn't want to risk carting mine all the way there) so we used an RA-06/ Arcam CD17 combo with Oddy 2 speaker cable.

First up were the 684s. I was already impressed by their simple yet stylish appearance and we began by playing Dave Brubeck's "Take Five". The sound was surprisingly natural and realistic, with decent punch and superb detail. To better gauge the treble performance I then gave Jarre's "Oxygene 2" a spin, which I always take with me to demos as I find it ideal for this purpose. Again I was impressed with the sweetness of the highs and the way that they weren't dominating proceedings but simply fitting-in perfectly alongside the mids & lows. Also there was no noticeable harshness at all.

I wanted to try the 684s with something slower and more delicate so next up was Harold Budd and Brian Eno's "The Pearl". Again, no problems. It seems as though these speakers are flexible when it comes to the type of music they're called on to reproduce. We also tried "Watershed" from Mark Hollis' 1998 solo album and this track particularly impressed me. The 684s handling of the close mic vocals made it sound as if Mark was actually singing right there in the room and the sparse arrangement allowed the textures of the instruments to become noticeable (you could almost 'feel' the guitar strings being plucked). So far so good.

We then wired up the RX6s to put them through their paces and began with the Hollis track again as that was still in the CD player. Immediately I noticed a greater presence in the treble than with the previous speakers. Ordinarily this is a big plus for me but as the track progressed I became less and less happy with this aspect. The strong, open highs were just too assertive and created a slight imbalance in the overall presentation, whereas the B&Ws had been more even and lifelike across the spectrum. This forwardness also imparted a somewhat unnatural sound to instruments, for instance, a tambourine near the end of Watershed had sounded surprisingly realistic on the first listen but with the Monitor Audios it was more like a simulation of a tambourine, as though it were being played on a synthesizer.

After another CD I decided that these weren't the speakers for me and asked for the KEFs to be hooked up. Once again I found these somewhat unsatisfactory. There was a noticeable laid-back quality to them (similar to my existing 714Vs) and also the impresison of a thin veil across the sound giving a slightly homogenized, very slightly muffled playback. However when we tried the 684s again I realised for the first time just how boomy the bass was from them. The Q500s aren't ported so they're perfectly happy with being placed near to back walls. I suddenly found myself in that miserable situation where you like aspects of two diferent speakers and realise this means you'll have to compromise...once again!

I wanted the open realism of the B&Ws but with the bass response of the KEFs. I asked the Audio-T guy if he had the 684s bungs to hand, which luckily he did. I wasn't all that hopeful to be honest as I had used foam bungs with my old AE Evo 3s and hadn't noticed any appreciable change. However, while the Evo 3 bungs had been quite sponge-like, these were more solid and, with all ports filled, you could hear the difference immediately. We found that the ideal arrangement was a full bung behind and just a half in front. Although ported speakers are obviously designed that way for a reason and operate best when un-blocked, I didn't hear any negative effect on, or degradation of, the highs and mids. I was mightily relieved.

So I purchased the 684s there and then and will hopefully receive them on Tuesday. I can't wait to hear them coupled with the 1520.

 

[Anonymous]

The 684's are superb speakers; real shame you werent able to demo thew QUAD 22L2's though

SightandSoundUK have them at a superb price and for me they were better than the 684's!

 

[aliahk]

Definitely Rx6!

I auditioned both head to head and the Ma Rx6 were much better.

Smoother sounder instruments and a lot less dark/boomy.

I thought the Rotel 1520 and the Ma Rx6 were a very good combination.

I have the speakers now for 8 months and still loving them each day more and more!

 

[Anonymous]

hifilover1979:

The 684's are superb speakers; real shame you werent able to demo thew QUAD 22L2's though

SightandSoundUK have them at a superb price and for me they were better than the 684's!

I know, and on paper the 22L2s sounded like good speakers to audition as well! At least the 684s have given me exactly what I was after so I'm really pleased overall. I was a little surprised though at how different the performance of the RX6s were, especially with so many on the forum championing them over the B&Ws. I guess we all prefer different aspects of sound when it comes to the music we like- Different people, different tastes. For me the treble on the MAs was just too much but perhaps with a different amp this wouldn't be an issue? I've heard many comments about the RA-06 being a bright sounding amp so perhaps the combined characteristics of the two simply resulted in an over-emphasis?

 

[Anonymous]

ChesterG:hifilover1979:

The 684's are superb speakers; real shame you werent able to demo thew QUAD 22L2's though

SightandSoundUK have them at a superb price and for me they were better than the 684's!

I know, and on paper the 22L2s sounded like good speakers to audition as well! At least the 684s have given me exactly what I was after so I'm really pleased overall. I was a little surprised though at how different the performance of the RX6s were, especially with so many on the forum championing them over the B&Ws. I guess we all prefer different aspects of sound when it comes to the music we like- Different people, different tastes. For me the treble on the MAs was just too much but perhaps with a different amp this wouldn't be an issue? I've heard many comments about the RA-06 being a bright sounding amp so perhaps the combined characteristics of the two simply resulted in an over-emphasis?

Defitely agree...

I went for the RX2's in my 2nd system with my NAD C355BEE amp but before demo'ing and deciding on them I listened to the M/A RX6's, B&W 684's, QUAD 22L2's and the MS Mezzo 6's and the QUAD's and RX6's were right up there at the top.

The B&W 684's were superb but they were a little muddy for me in comparison to the RX6's; I did demo the B&W 683's as well which I thought were absolutely superb but a bit too big/too much for the room I've got my 2nd system in

The MS Mezzo 6's IMO were awful but they were brand new but they just sounded lifeless and hollow...

Once your B&W 684's have run in I'm sure they'll sound superb; I really did like them but overall the M/A sound was more for me...

 

[Anonymous]

aliahk:

Definitely Rx6!

I auditioned both head to head and the Ma Rx6 were much better.

Smoother sounder instruments and a lot less dark/boomy.

I thought the Rotel 1520 and the Ma Rx6 were a very good combination.

I have the speakers now for 8 months and still loving them each day more and more!

The RX6s are indeed great speakers and they certainly were less boomy than the 684s. What I felt though was that the B&Ws, despite being a bit bassy when un-bunged, had a sound that was more true to life. I was particularly struck by how accurate and realistic their reproduction was, while at the same time not lacking in drive. I suppose the MAs had a livelier sound (to my ears at any rate) with a particularly outstanding tweeter performance but in my demo it was a dominating characteristic and made the tracks sound a little 'thinner' (if that makes sense!) and slightly more artificial as a result.

Really it was such a slight thing that if I hadn't heard the 684s first I probably wouldn't have noticed it. But the surprisingly natural and strong sound of the 684 speakers simply set a high benchmark as far as my ears were concerned. I only wish that their cabinets were a tad smaller and lacked a back-firing port!

 

[Anonymous]

what about the B&W 685?

 

[007L2Thrill]

hifilover1979:

The B&W 684's were superb but they were a little muddy for me in comparison to the RX6's; I did demo the B&W 683's as well which I thought were absolutely superb but a bit too big/too much for the room I've got my 2nd system in

Glad to see someone who demoed the B&W 683 and RX6 together, if your room was big enough would you of picked the B&W 683 over the MA's as I am considering them and KEF, so I would like to hear your thoughts!

Cheers.

 

[Anonymous]

007L2Thrill:hifilover1979:

The B&W 684's were superb but they were a little muddy for me in comparison to the RX6's; I did demo the B&W 683's as well which I thought were absolutely superb but a bit too big/too much for the room I've got my 2nd system in

Glad to see someone who
demoed the B&W 683 and RX6 together, if your room was big enough would you of picked the B&W 683 over the MA's as I am considering them and KEF, so I would like to hear your thoughts!

Cheers.

i had a pair of rx6s for 6 months 007, i think they are very good speakers but in my room, (which is quite bare and reflective, not ideal i guess) they could get quite fatiguing after listening to them for a while, and there was sometimes a little harshness in the high frequencies..
not putting you off them, but if your room is anything like mine you may encounter the same issues..

 

[plastic penguin]

ChesterG:

I recently replaced my Rotel RA-06 with a 1520 which has certainly breathed new life into my setup. However there is still a noticeable restraint/ politeness when playing faster music so I'm looking to replace my Focal 714Vs as well and was wondering if anyone could advise me which floorstanders I should audition? I'm looking for something around the £700 mark.

I'm currently having to play at low-ish volumes and with the speakers approx. 12" from a back wall. Overall, I've been happy enough with the general rich character and sweet treble of the Focal sound and wouldn't want to trade this off with the new speakers if at all possible- I just want to achieve a bit more 'punch'.

After having a quick look at some previous posts, I've noted two possibilities: B&W 684s and MA RX6s. Apparently the B&Ws make a particularly good match as they share components with Rotel? But I've also read that the 684s can come across a little muddled at lower volumes. Perhaps the power and sheer brio of the 1520 will help to overcome this though? I believe that the B&Ws are also supplied with bungs for the bass ports, so that might help with the positioning issues as well.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Rotel 1520......Arcam CD73T......Pro-ject RPM4......Focal 714V......Chord Odyssey 2 speaker cable.

One suggestion I reckon will go very well with the RA-1520: Totem Arro. Excellent sound from a titchy speaker. I know the RRP is way over your budget, Audio-T are doing them for around £800.

 

[007L2Thrill]

maxflinn:007L2Thrill:hifilover1979:

The B&W 684's were superb but they were a little muddy for me in comparison to the RX6's; I did demo the B&W 683's as well which I thought were absolutely superb but a bit too big/too much for the room I've got my 2nd system in

Glad to see someone who
demoed the B&W 683 and RX6 together, if your room was big enough would you of picked the B&W 683 over the MA's as I am considering them and KEF, so I would like to hear your thoughts!

Cheers.

i had a pair of rx6s for 6 months 007, i think they are very good speakers but in my room, (which is quite bare and reflective, not ideal i guess) they could get quite fatiguing after listening to them for a while, and there was sometimes a little harshness in the high frequencies..

not putting you off them, but if your room is anything like mine you may encounter the same issues..

Cheers max!

no you not putting me off just getting peoples thoughts of different speakers as I sometimes I find you get a speaker after a demo and a couple of months down the road you start picking faults with them.

I noticed a few say the MA can be fatiguing but others say they are smooth.

How did you find the overall treble response as you had the complete home system set-up didn't you? You say there's a little harshness in the treble was that at high volume or did it still do it at low to medium volume.

How far do you sit away from your speakers as I sit just over 3m.

 

[Anonymous]

perhaps those that find them smooth do so because they are being used in a more damped envoirement, ie a room that's carpeted and has lots of soft furnishings. i wouldn't say they were smooth, they sounded bright and sometimes harsh (with high frequencies) in my room but the room could have been the reason for that.

i've since got some dynaudios that are smoother with no harshness at all, now the fact that they have a soft dome tweeter as opposed to the rx6s metal one may be the reason for that, although afaik the b&w 684s also have a metal tweeter yet many say they are smooth

i also sit 3 metres from my speakers, and yes it was mainly at higher volumes that i found harshness in the highs with my rx6s, and primarily with music too, movies sounded great but i still prefer my current speakers for movies .

 

[007L2Thrill]

Cheers max, my room is carpeted and soft furnishings so may be ok, saying that I have all metal dome tweeters in my speakers now and they are too smooth that's why I am looking for new speakers some with a little more energy in the treble and more deep bass.

I had a pair of mission 783 which was with my naim system a long time ago and they add soft dome tweeters and they could wipe the floor with my Tannoys I have now for energy output in there treble that's why I was thinking the harshness was due to the RX6, but will have to get a loan pair I think to try my self if possible.

Glad you got a pair of speakers you like max as its all down to enjoyment.

 

[Anonymous]

007L2Thrill:

Cheers max, my room is carpeted and
soft furnishings so may be ok, saying that I have all metal dome tweeters in my speakers now and they are too smooth that's why I am looking for new speakers some with a little more energy in the treble and more deep bass.

I had a pair of mission 783 which was with my naim system a long time ago and they add soft dome tweeters and they could wipe the floor with my Tannoys I have now for energy output in there treble that's why I was thinking the
harshness was due to the RX6, but will have to get a loan pair I think to try my self if possible.

Glad you got a pair of speakers you like max as its all down to enjoyment.

hmmm, sounds like in your room the rx6s may just fit the bill, good luck with the search anyways