Sonus Faber Amati Anniversario, Quad 2805, and more....

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Joey_V

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
4,380
Reaction score
1
Location
Dallas, TX
Well, yesterday, Melissa and I went to a sushi restaurant for some dinner after being on-call for over 24hrs at the hospital. On our walk there, I caught a sign that said, "audio professionals" hung outside a somewhat small-ish storefront right next to the sushi restaurant.

I took a quick look at the hours of establishment and it was to close at 8p that night. I looked at my watch and realized that we only had 90 minutes to eat, pay the bill, and walk over to the adjacent audio store before they closed for the night. Anyway, to make a long story short, I ended up cutting the dinner slightly early (gf didnt get last order of Miso soup) just to make it before the 8p closing time! :eek:

Needless to say, Melissa was none too happy.... :( .

So I walked in through the doors and was greeted by this guy sitting relaxed on a sofa watching the news. He didnt give me much of an acknowledgement, probably because of my age. I mentioned that I noticed he had a pair of Sonus Faber Amati Anniversarios in the lower floor judging by what I saw through the window and his eyes perked up and smiled. He was impressed that I could tell what the speakers were from such a small window opening, and he brought me to the half-basement where the Amatis were.

He closed the doors and the blinds, dimmed the lights. I took a look around the room, the room appeared to be well treated and as symmetrical as they come. A bit of a pentagon shaped, the back of the room was sort of a bay-window type of an enclosure. The couch was positioned about 5 feet from the back wall, the Amatis about 4 feet from the front with a plant in the middle of the pair of speakers. Electronics were on racks along the left wall, all Naim's top gear. I asked him how much did the electronics (CDP, preamp, amp) retail for, and he gave me a number that exceeded the cost of my good friend's 2004 BMW M3.

Stunned by the fact that his preamp cost more than my entire front end... I took a seat, only to forget that I had not inspected the SF Amatis! So I got up and examined the speakers in all its glory.

Sat down and the first notes came. If you havent heard this speaker, boy, you're in for a treat! Very clean, very good imaging, very good depth... VERY good depth, did I say that twice? There were times that I didnt even have to close my eyes to appreciate the music soundstage... I found myself trying look around the right speaker to see if the singer was standing there. Amazing sense of PRAT, amazing sense of space, amazing sense of cohesiveness.... just an amazing speaker! Midbass.... probably faster than the Summits in certain parts.

Overall:
- A slightly laid back soundstage, usually behind or at speaker plane.
- Midbass was quicker than anything I have heard so far.
- Taut bass, right on the dot, easily besting anything I have heard, even my Summits.
- Vocals were well focused and had that "volumetric" effect... like you could tell that it had size and palpability. You could tell if it was closed mic'd or not and whether or not the singer was physically dynamic with regards to the positioning relative to the mic.
- Midrange was right on the money, beautiful!
- Speaker build was far better than anything I have seen in person so far.... and the leather was soft!
- PALPABILITY!

Next up, we went over to the affordable room. Quad 2805 electrostats with some Naim gear. The entire system was similar in price to my system, so I could finally compare apples to apples, sort of. About $12K in front end equipment and $9K for the Quads.... for a room that totalled about $21K. Quads were set up about 4 feet from the front wall, and the sofa was about 4 feet from the rear. There was a plant between the Quads and some diffusors that were situated behind each of the speakers. The owner went on to berate the Martin Logans, saying that ML electrostats are NOTHING compared to the Quads and that the Quad's method of implementing the entire "cascading frequency" throughout the entire planar sheet mimicked the principles of a single-driver system better than the hybrid Summit.

I argued with him, but since he had more experience and he was the owner of the place, I digressed and said, "well, regardless of what the speaker's design, the sound is the end result, so let's hear the Quads."

First note, I noticed that the soundstage was remarkably short. I'm not sure if this was because of the spoils from listening to the Amatis prior to the Quads or what, but the soundstage, I swear, was short! The instruments were not very tall and I couldnt appreciate the spacing between them as much. Sounded more ethereal than the Summits, but no palpability! Imaging was not as focused as I'd like them to be (not even close to the Summits in my system or the Amatis I had heard previously). Disappointed.

Overall:
- Ethereal sound, not focused.
- Lacked palpability, not that it didnt have palpability, but it wasnt at the level of the Summits in my own electronics and/or the Amatis on the full-onslaught Naim.
- Bass, non-existent.
- Couldnt get loud, dynamically limited.
- Short soundstage.
- NOT impressed, regardless of how much the owner ragged on the curved ML stats and the hybrid build of the Summits. Pshhh....:rolleyes: .

A great night and I wished I took photos! The owner, John, told me to come back again... just to kick around and spend more time with the Amatis. He was previously a Wilson dealer and a Plinius dealer so he was familiar with my stuff. Cool guy, obviously biased as we all are. Great knowledge, far surpassing my own. I learned quite a bit from him that night, I'll be back next time we go for sushi.

Apologies to my gf, ahead of time....

:)

Joey
 
Last edited:
Brilliant Reveiws Joey!

Joey,

Great reviews of SF Amati and the Quad 2805 as compaired to your own wonderful Summit system... ;) I found your insights and discrptions as articulate and as well spoken / written as ever. I really appreicate your sharing your audio auditioning experience with us. Your review is a audio gift to all of us here at the ML Club, just outstanding... :D

:D Thanks again, Joey
 
I wonder why the owner started bashing Logans. Maybe someone should take some Summits over to him, hook them up to the exact same system the Quads were playing on and let him hear them.
 
I wonder why the owner started bashing Logans. Maybe someone should take some Summits over to him, hook them up to the exact same system the Quads were playing on and let him hear them.

Tom, it's like showing off Mac OSX to an XP user :D

We know which is better, no need to convince them, and, as with Macs vs PC's, they are full of prejudices (ML's have a very narrow spot, ML's are expensive, ML's are difficult to drive etc etc)
 
Last edited:
Tom, it's like showing off Mac OSX to an XP user :D

We know which is better, no need to convince them, and, as with Macs vs PC's, they are full of prejudices (ML's have a very narrow spot, ML's are expensive, ML's are difficult to drive etc etc)

Ah, ML's are expensive, some are difficult to drive, the sweet spot is narrow, though not like they used to be, so these aren't necessarily prejudices just facts in the general sense.
 
Very interesting Joey, glad you got to hear the Quad 2805's for tomorrow I'm headed to Overture for a mid-day audtion of the 2905's !!

I will be bring some of my favorite Lp's and CD's and report back with my findings !!
 
I wonder why the owner started bashing Logans. Maybe someone should take some Summits over to him, hook them up to the exact same system the Quads were playing on and let him hear them.

Wouldn't recommend it. He's driving the Quads off Naim kit - big on headline watts, but low current output. I've tried ML on Naim, and it just doesn't work out too well - the amps can't deliver the current that MLs need to sing. Some of their really big amps might be OK, but you're talking a lot more $$$ than is mentioned here!!

Cheers,

David
 
David, Good point !! Tomorrow when I audition the 2905's , they will be fed by Spectral DMA-360 monoblocks. I have heard the Summitt's driven by these and they do a wonderfull job indeed ! I have no doubt the power and speed of these amps will perform superbly on the Quads as well.
 
Been there, done that. There is nothing worse in Hifi / Highend, as far as I know, than the marriage between Naims and Martin Logans. It does not work, it is terrible and doomed to spray brown paint on both brands.
 
Naim into Quad is not a good combination historically. Exactly as you describe Joey the so called flat earth approach. Big believers in PRAT but little attention to soundstage.

I think if you heard Quads driven by your Plinius (you know you want to try) you would begin to understand the Quad magic. In some ways the Quad sound is superior to ML giving extraordinary results with small group and vocal performances but being less capable with rock and symphonic material. The newer Quad speakers apparently address this according to reviews. However if you live for the bass thump of a PA system I suspect Quads will nwver appeal.

Kevin
 
Joey,

Do you know what equipment was used on the Sonus Faber Amati Anniversario. Pre, Amps, cdp????

Thanks!
D
 
Cool experiences as usual, Joey. You are one lucky bastage - you bypass more hi-fi shops to and from work or casual dinner dates than I could going 4-5 hours in either direction of my home on the main interstate!

As said before; I see Sonus Faber in your future... Arent' those Scan-Speak drivers somethin else? Palpability is what they are all about.

I suspect those Quad's had a bit more to show you. While I am no guru on boxless speakers or Naim for that matter; just going off of the traditional class A/B transistor topologies suggest that their lack of a high bandwidth powersupply and minimal means of capacitance in their affordable lines suggest a poor match with current hungry speakers. Lets put it this way, if you were to use the Naim combo on your Logans - a lot of their magic in sound-staging, dynamics, and detail will be severely sacrificed. Historically, the more affordable Naim electronics are best suited with dynamic loudspeakers that are located either in small rooms, or boast great efficiency. Still - the guy openly bashed a product and couldn't deliver the goods when it came show-time. Thats a big no-no in the industry and its that sort of attitude that will have you sitting on your rear watching the game in the middle of the industry's busy-season... then again, it was the end of the night.
 
Last edited:
Naim and Quad

Possibly the worst amp in the world into a Quad:devil: Try hearing the 2805 with a nice 100 watt tube amp and you'll be singing a different song. When I sold HE we sold the ESL 63 which was/is a great speaker; the 2805/2905 are leagues better but are really dear with the horrible exchange rate. The Treasury needs to support the dollar more aggressively, IMO.

PS: Quads don't like a lot of current. IME they don't respond well and have a pretty good circuit to protect themselves from us!
 
Last edited:
Been there, done that. There is nothing worse in Hifi / Highend, as far as I know, than the marriage between Naims and Martin Logans. It does not work, it is terrible and doomed to spray brown paint on both brands.

Apparently youve never heard Martin Logan driven by a Tandberg amp...:eek:

That was perhaps the worst combination I've ever heard--luckily, the fellow who was trying to sell me the Tandberg let me try it at home for 2 days before I bought it. Flat, grainy, and NO stride whatsoever. It was perhaps the most anemic-sounding amp I've ever had plugged into my Sequels, and it was rated as a 150wpc amp.

My Carver M-200t (110wpc) sounded better...

--Richard
 
Joey,

loved your review! I like finding obscure little hifi stores and hanging out listening to their gear too. It's those out-of-the-way ones that are usually a real treat--even if their owners are more often than not, very opinionated, snobbish, closed-minded wankers...:D

I think that perhaps the reason he was bashing the MLs so much is purely economic: He sells Quads and not MLs. Of course he's going to bash MLs. They are his competition.

That is one of the biggest problems with the audio business--if the other guy's product is better, then most salesmen feel they have to trash-talk it. It's not enough to say "Quads are DIFFERENT", they think they have to say "ML sucks".

I like Quads. They do have a certain magic, especially when driven by authoritative tube amps. There is an open-ness, and airyness, and a sweetness to their mids and highs that are almost unequalled. But inless you have a perfectly matched subwoofer, they will sound "weak" compared wth hybrids like MLs...

It is just like the Mac vs PC thing that some one mentioned earlier. They will cite all sorts of "facts" (not much software, difficult to perform maintenance, etc) all of which are either outright lies or mute points, rather than just saying "Their box is DIFFERENT from out box".

In the end, we all know which is REALLY the superior computer/speaker/amp/cd plaer/turntable, etc. It's the one we like best in our system! ;)

--Richard C.
 
Joey,

Great reviews of SF Amati and the Quad 2805 as compaired to your own wonderful Summit system... ;) I found your insights and discrptions as articulate and as well spoken / written as ever. I really appreicate your sharing your audio auditioning experience with us. Your review is a audio gift to all of us here at the ML Club, just outstanding... :D

:D Thanks again, Joey

Ditto! Thanks Joey!
 
Quad's sound great! They do bass almost as well as CLS's. REL subs match up to them pretty well. They do sound different from Logan's. The Quads have a bit more air and detail, not as solid of an image (i.e. etheral). Logan's are definitely more dynamic. Which is better????

Sonus Faber has to make some of most beautiful looking speakers. They sound great too. The good ones are mucho $$$$$'s. Avalon's do it for less. Both Avalon's and Sonus Fabor's can really do justice to the sound of a saxophone.

Not a Naim fan.
 
It is just like the Mac vs PC thing that some one mentioned earlier. They will cite all sorts of "facts" (not much software, difficult to perform maintenance, etc) all of which are either outright lies or mute points, rather than just saying "Their box is DIFFERENT from out box".

There are computers OTHER THAN Macs out there?! I wouldn't know ANYTHING ABOUT THAT! I still use a Newton 2100 for heavens sake!!! :D
 
There are computers OTHER THAN Macs out there?! I wouldn't know ANYTHING ABOUT THAT! I still use a Newton 2100 for heavens sake!!! :D
Saw this on a guy's office door: "The box said to install Windows 98 or better. So I installed Linux." :)

While I am happy with WXP and Linux overall, my short experience with OSX tells me that no other OS has been designed and tested for usability like Mac OS.
 
Back
Top