Q Acoustics 1010i vs AVI DM10. Get ready for a suprise!

[steve_1979]

I used to own the Q Acoustics 1010i 5.1 system a few years ago so when I saw a second hand pair in a local shop today I had to have a quick listen to see how they compare to my AVI DM10's.

So after 4 years of living with the urber clarity and accuracy of the AVI sound what was it like going back to some super cheap almost pocket change Q Acoustics 1010's. Well, they actually sounded really really good. Much better than such a cheap and compact speaker has any right to sound and in some ways I actually preferred them to my DM10's. Really!

From the first second that I heard them I remembered why I bought some a few years ago. Sure they're not really anywhere near as good as the DM10's. The clarity and stereo image on the DM10's is off the scale and far better than anything else that I've ever heard elsewhere and the 1010's just don't compare in this respect. But they do have a smooth, easy going care free sound that's so much fun. The sound has a smooth gloss that's just so easy and enjoyable to listen to. The DM10's microscopic accuracy is warts and all honest. With well recorded music they'll blow you away with how good they sound and they still remain very enjoyable with badly recorded music too but you'll hear every little detail in every way, be it good or bad. The 1010's on the other hand smooth over every crinkle and hard edge and give everything the same smooth glossy sound no matter what the recording is like but they do it in a way that's hugely pleasant. Sure they don't have big dynamics, the stereo image is just left, right and centre with no depth or anything in between but Q Acoustics speakers have an ability to put the smile on your face and keep you listening for countless hours in a way that few other speakers can. They are what audiophools would call 'musical' sounding.

Don't get me wrong I love my DM10's and they're far better speakers in every way. But the budget 1010's still have a silly fun element to the sound which the DM10's and almost all other 'proper' hifi speakers seem to be lacking. No matter how good the DM10's maybe there's still something in the fundamental DNA of the 1010's that I liked more.

If you've only got £100 to spend some second hand Q Acoustics speakers (any of them) and a cheap second hand amp will have you grinning ear to ear. Highly recommended.

 

[iQ Speakers]

I used to own the Q Acoustics 1010i 5.1 system a few years ago so when I saw a second hand pair in a local shop today I had to have a quick listen to see how they compare to my AVI DM10's.

So after 4 years of living with the urber clarity and accuracy of the AVI sound what was it like going back to some super cheap almost pocket change Q Acoustics 1010's. Well, they actually sounded really really good. Much better than such a cheap and compact speaker has any right to sound and in some ways I actually preferred them to my DM10's. Really!

From the first second that I heard them I remembered why I bought some a few years ago. Sure they're not really anywhere near as good as the DM10's. The clarity and stereo image on the DM10's is off the scale and far better than anything else that I've ever heard elsewhere and the 1010's just don't compare in this respect. But they do have a smooth, easy going care free sound that's so much fun. The sound has a smooth gloss that's just so easy and enjoyable to listen to. The DM10's microscopic accuracy is warts and all honest. With well recorded music they'll blow you away with how good they sound and they still remain very enjoyable with badly recorded music too but you'll hear every little detail in every way, be it good or bad. The 1010's on the other hand smooth over every crinkle and hard edge and give everything the same smooth glossy sound no matter what the recording is like but they do it in a way that's hugely pleasant. Sure they don't have big dynamics, the stereo image is just left, right and centre with no depth or anything in between but Q Acoustics speakers have an ability to put the smile on your face and keep you listening for countless hours in a way that few other speakers can. They are what audiophools would call 'musical' sounding.

Don't get me wrong I love my DM10's and they're far better speakers in every way. But the budget 1010's still have a silly fun element to the sound which the DM10's and almost all other 'proper' hifi speakers seem to be lacking. No matter how good the DM10's maybe there's still something in the fundamental DNA of the 1010's that I liked more.

If you've only got £100 to spend some second hand Q Acoustics speakers (any of them) and a cheap second hand amp will have you grinning ear to ear. Highly recommended.

Hi Steve 2 things, I was deeply impressed by Q Acoustics at the Bristol show, deeply! Whilst the AVI 9.1RS (£800 used) I installed for Mum were excellent and perfect for her situation and budget they were not anywhere near as good as my M1's let alone the S2's. When I built the tiny M4M's slightly smaller than the 9.1's it confirmed it to me. Not wishing to start an AVI inspired debate I did not comment. In hindsight I should of pushed her to get some and an amp, then she would of needed a streamer with DAC pushing the cost even further. She's over the moon with them, I also to think they are very good given her criteria. Nice to see somebody being real and honest. I was the same when I bought the Sugden A21SE it was OK but not a huge improvement over the Pulse.

 

[matt49]

Steve, I fail to see any "surprise" at all. You say the DM10s are "far better speakers in every way". Well, yes, that's exactly what I'd expect you to say.

The journalese reference to the "DNA" of the Q Acoustics doesn't say anything meaningful at all.

Also the title of the thread is misleading, as it suggests you've done a side-by-side comparison of the two speakers, which isn't the case.

I know we're all prone to using our own kit as a reference point, but in this case you've really gone overboard with the AVI mentions. Couldn't you have done a write-up of the Q Acoustics without constantly referring to your DM10s?

 

[plastic penguin]

I used to own the Q Acoustics 1010i 5.1 system a few years ago so when I saw a second hand pair in a local shop today I had to have a quick listen to see how they compare to my AVI DM10's.

So after 4 years of living with the urber clarity and accuracy of the AVI sound what was it like going back to some super cheap almost pocket change Q Acoustics 1010's. Well, they actually sounded really really good. Much better than such a cheap and compact speaker has any right to sound and in some ways I actually preferred them to my DM10's. Really!

From the first second that I heard them I remembered why I bought some a few years ago. Sure they're not really anywhere near as good as the DM10's. The clarity and stereo image on the DM10's is off the scale and far better than anything else that I've ever heard elsewhere and the 1010's just don't compare in this respect. But they do have a smooth, easy going care free sound that's so much fun. The sound has a smooth gloss that's just so easy and enjoyable to listen to. The DM10's microscopic accuracy is warts and all honest. With well recorded music they'll blow you away with how good they sound and they still remain very enjoyable with badly recorded music too but you'll hear every little detail in every way, be it good or bad. The 1010's on the other hand smooth over every crinkle and hard edge and give everything the same smooth glossy sound no matter what the recording is like but they do it in a way that's hugely pleasant. Sure they don't have big dynamics, the stereo image is just left, right and centre with no depth or anything in between but Q Acoustics speakers have an ability to put the smile on your face and keep you listening for countless hours in a way that few other speakers can. They are what audiophools would call 'musical' sounding.

Don't get me wrong I love my DM10's and they're far better speakers in every way. But the budget 1010's still have a silly fun element to the sound which the DM10's and almost all other 'proper' hifi speakers seem to be lacking. No matter how good the DM10's maybe there's still something in the fundamental DNA of the 1010's that I liked more.

If you've only got £100 to spend some second hand Q Acoustics speakers (any of them) and a cheap second hand amp will have you grinning ear to ear. Highly recommended.

Think I mentioned something similar along those lines about my CDP and budget turntable: The Electro CDP is far superior to the budget Pro-ject, but I get equal amounts of enjoyment from both.

 

[lindsayt]

Excellent. All you need now is speakers that you find even more fun, musical, and interesting than the 1010's and with even better focus, soundstaging and clarity than the ADM10's.

 

[steve_1979]

To sum up the 1010's on their own I would say that they sound like they've been dipped in thick sweet syrup. And I like syrup.

 

[lpv]

yeah.. but you can say the same in any situation..

- I have my medium format camera but I do enjoy my small pocket 35mm point & shoot.. it gives me so much pleasure and it put smile on my face.

- I have my big Mercedes but I do enjoy my 2 seater.. it gives me so much joy in sunny weekends

- I do have my tank at the rear but I like my gun.. It gives me ultimate pleasure now and then

or.. my machete? I couldn't live without one, but my swiss knife does the job every single time.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

The Q's are imo dull speakers.

I've heard the 1010's in a stereo config . Also listened to them at the Bristol show or Q's latest versions and my opinion remains.

Speakers for those with sensitive ears. Never heard the the DM's.

 

[steve_1979]

yeah.. but you can say the same in any situation..

- I have my medium format camera but I do enjoy my small pocket 35mm point & shoot.. it gives me so much pleasure and it put smile on my face.

- I have my big Mercedes but I do enjoy my 2 seater.. it gives me so much joy in sunny weekends

- I do have my tank at the rear but I like my gun.. It gives me ultimate pleasure now and then

or.. my machete? I couldn't live without one, but my swiss knife does the job every single time.

I like the sanity and accuracy of the AVI forum but the madness and cable threads of the WHF forum is so much more fun.

 

[steve_1979]

Speakers for those with sensitive ears.

That pretty much sums me up which is probably why I like the Q's so much. The 1010's are the worst of the Q Acoustics that I've heard too.

I find most speakers unlistenable.

 

[iQ Speakers]

As I said it's refreshing for somebody to stand up and be honest.

 

[steve_1979]

I used to own the Q Acoustics 1010i 5.1 system a few years ago so when I saw a second hand pair in a local shop today I had to have a quick listen to see how they compare to my AVI DM10's.

So after 4 years of living with the urber clarity and accuracy of the AVI sound what was it like going back to some super cheap almost pocket change Q Acoustics 1010's. Well, they actually sounded really really good. Much better than such a cheap and compact speaker has any right to sound and in some ways I actually preferred them to my DM10's. Really!

From the first second that I heard them I remembered why I bought some a few years ago. Sure they're not really anywhere near as good as the DM10's. The clarity and stereo image on the DM10's is off the scale and far better than anything else that I've ever heard elsewhere and the 1010's just don't compare in this respect. But they do have a smooth, easy going care free sound that's so much fun. The sound has a smooth gloss that's just so easy and enjoyable to listen to. The DM10's microscopic accuracy is warts and all honest. With well recorded music they'll blow you away with how good they sound and they still remain very enjoyable with badly recorded music too but you'll hear every little detail in every way, be it good or bad. The 1010's on the other hand smooth over every crinkle and hard edge and give everything the same smooth glossy sound no matter what the recording is like but they do it in a way that's hugely pleasant. Sure they don't have big dynamics, the stereo image is just left, right and centre with no depth or anything in between but Q Acoustics speakers have an ability to put the smile on your face and keep you listening for countless hours in a way that few other speakers can. They are what audiophools would call 'musical' sounding.

Don't get me wrong I love my DM10's and they're far better speakers in every way. But the budget 1010's still have a silly fun element to the sound which the DM10's and almost all other 'proper' hifi speakers seem to be lacking. No matter how good the DM10's maybe there's still something in the fundamental DNA of the 1010's that I liked more.

If you've only got £100 to spend some second hand Q Acoustics speakers (any of them) and a cheap second hand amp will have you grinning ear to ear. Highly recommended.

Think I mentioned something similar along those lines about my CDP and budget turntable: The Electro CDP is far superior to the budget Pro-ject, but I get equal amounts of enjoyment from both.

That's exactly the point that I was trying to get at. While one is technically much better, the other can still be just as enjoyable, possibility even more so in some ways.

Comparing the DM10's to the 1010's is very similar to comparing digital to vinyl. Despite the DM10's being better it wouldn't surprise me if there were some people who actually liked the 1010's more.

 

[steve_1979]

As I said it's refreshing for somebody to stand up and be honest.

Ta.

 

[steve_1979]

Steve, I fail to see any "surprise" at all. You say the DM10s are "far better speakers in every way". Well, yes, that's exactly what I'd expect you to say.

The journalese reference to the "DNA" of the Q Acoustics doesn't say anything meaningful at all.

Also the title of the thread is misleading, as it suggests you've done a side-by-side comparison of the two speakers, which isn't the case.

I know we're all prone to using our own kit as a reference point, but in this case you've really gone overboard with the AVI mentions. Couldn't you have done a write-up of the Q Acoustics without constantly referring to your DM10s?

Sorry if a 'comparison' rather than a review bothers you but I'm just describing my experience of two speakers that I've owned as I see them. If you do a search of the forum I think I did an 1010i 5.1 system review several years ago.

To say that the DM10's are better in every way isn't really correct. The 1010's are actually the better speaker in the sense that they're more fun. Technically the DM10's are more accurate but I was really shocked by just good the 1010's are even next to much more expensive and accomplished speakers. They're stunning little speakers and the same can be said for all the Q Acoustics that I've heard. Technically when you look at them in detail there's nothing very special in any one area but overall they're such a bundle of fun.

 

[steve_1979]

Excellent. All you need now is speakers that you find even more fun, musical, and interesting than the 1010's and with even better focus, soundstaging and clarity than the ADM10's.

I've never heard them but I imagine the Q Acoustics Concept 20's on the end of a high quality amplifier would make an ideal halfway point between the two different styles of speakers. Or maybe just very good whilst also being less detailed than the DM10's and less fun than the 1010's?

I'd like to hear some Concept 20's with active crossovers...

 

[plastic penguin]

My only experience of Q Acoustics were the 2010s powered by the Marantz 603. Sounded really good and well balanced. And all that for about £150 (original retail price). Excellent VFM.

IMO them and the old Wharfedale Diamond 9.1 were both excellent and flexible in terms of system matching.

 

[steve_1979]

My only experience of Q Acoustics were the 2010s powered by the Marantz 603. Sounded really good and well balanced. And all that for about £150 (original retail price). Excellent VFM.

IMO them and the old Wharfedale Diamond 9.1 were both excellent and flexible in terms of system matching.

They lack the detail, dynamics and imaging of expensive high quality hifi speakers but if all you want is something to play music on in a totally non harsh and very enjoyable manner after a stressful day at work Q Acoustics are pretty much unbeatable IMO.

 

[steve_1979]

The DM5's sound like a smaller version of the DM10's. A bit less powerful and a bit less details but overall very similar sounding.

Q Acoustics are very different. They cover up the sound and add a smooth sheen to everything they play and make everything sound the same. The treble sounds like it's been turned down a couple of dB too. The sound they produce could never be mistaken for being like a real musical instrument being played in the read world like the DM5/DM10's can. What the Q Acoustics are adding is an unnatural sounding distortion to the music, but it's a distortion that makes it sound soft and pleasant.

 

[plastic penguin]

This proves one thing: You don't need to spend fortunes to have a fun-sounding set-up. I loved my A65+. It had a quirky presentation, a joy to be around. The only real downside (if you call it a downside) is it wasn't good for parties. But at 40 wpc, I wouldn't expect it to blast walls down.

Regards distortion, let me play devil's advocate:

How do you know those Q Acoustics are distorted? Please don't quote spec sheets or laboratory printouts or the propaganda shovelled out on the other forum.

Apart from taking an amp/speakers beyond their max wattage and obvious clipping, how do you - or anybody else - know that warmth or smoothness of the budget speakers is distortion or not in your own living room?

Have to confess, after nearly 40 years of hi-fi ownership, I've not heard any real audible distortion, aside of hitting the volume knob too hard, probably since the days of my JVC receiver and little Solavox speakers. Almost blew the bloody things up!

 

[matt49]

Steve, I fail to see any "surprise" at all. You say the DM10s are "far better speakers in every way". Well, yes, that's exactly what I'd expect you to say.

The journalese reference to the "DNA" of the Q Acoustics doesn't say anything meaningful at all.

Also the title of the thread is misleading, as it suggests you've done a side-by-side comparison of the two speakers, which isn't the case.

I know we're all prone to using our own kit as a reference point, but in this case you've really gone overboard with the AVI mentions. Couldn't you have done a write-up of the Q Acoustics without constantly referring to your DM10s?

Sorry if a 'comparison' rather than a review bothers you but I'm just describing my experience of two speakers that I've owned as I see them. If you do a search of the forum I think I did an 1010i 5.1 system review several years ago.

To say that the DM10's are better in every way isn't really correct. The 1010's are actually the better speaker in the sense that they're more fun. Technically the DM10's are more accurate but I was really shocked by just good the 1010's are even next to much more expensive and accomplished speakers. They're stunning little speakers and the same can be said for all the Q Acoustics that I've heard. Technically when you look at them in detail there's nothing very special in any one area but overall they're such a bundle of fun.

Sorry, Steve, I was feeling rather grumpy yesterday (though my point about the "DNA" of the Q Acoustics still stands). *sad*

 

[steve_1979]

This proves one thing: You don't need to spend fortunes to have a fun-sounding set-up. I loved my A65+. It had a quirky presentation, a joy to be around. The only real downside (if you call it a downside) is it wasn't good for parties. But at 40 wpc, I wouldn't expect it to blast walls down.

Regards distortion, let me play devil's advocate:

How do you know those Q Acoustics are distorted? Please don't quote spec sheets or laboratory printouts or the propaganda shovelled out on the other forum.

Apart from taking an amp/speakers beyond their max wattage and obvious clipping, how do you - or anybody else - know that warmth or smoothness of the budget speakers is distortion or not in your own living room?

Have to confess, after nearly 40 years of hi-fi ownership, I've not heard any real audible distortion, aside of hitting the volume knob too hard, probably since the days of my JVC receiver and little Solavox speakers. Almost blew the bloody things up!

What I call distortion is what you or many other people may call colouration.

The 1010's have a similar sound no matter what's played through them where the DM10's vary depending on what's being played. The 1010's could never sound like a real musical instrument or voice does in the real world where the DM10's can and do reproduce sound that really does sound life like and is almost identical to what the real world sounds like. Therefore I assume that it's the 1010's that have a distorted (or pleasantly coloured) sound where the DM10's are more accurate.

 

[steve_1979]

Steve, I fail to see any "surprise" at all. You say the DM10s are "far better speakers in every way". Well, yes, that's exactly what I'd expect you to say.

The journalese reference to the "DNA" of the Q Acoustics doesn't say anything meaningful at all.

Also the title of the thread is misleading, as it suggests you've done a side-by-side comparison of the two speakers, which isn't the case.

I know we're all prone to using our own kit as a reference point, but in this case you've really gone overboard with the AVI mentions. Couldn't you have done a write-up of the Q Acoustics without constantly referring to your DM10s?

Sorry if a 'comparison' rather than a review bothers you but I'm just describing my experience of two speakers that I've owned as I see them. If you do a search of the forum I think I did an 1010i 5.1 system review several years ago.

To say that the DM10's are better in every way isn't really correct. The 1010's are actually the better speaker in the sense that they're more fun. Technically the DM10's are more accurate but I was really shocked by just good the 1010's are even next to much more expensive and accomplished speakers. They're stunning little speakers and the same can be said for all the Q Acoustics that I've heard. Technically when you look at them in detail there's nothing very special in any one area but overall they're such a bundle of fun.

Sorry, Steve, I was feeling rather grumpy yesterday (though my point about the "DNA" of the Q Acoustics still stands). *sad*

No worries.

The DNA comment was just a load of poetic flowery bol**** to be fair.