T
Taz
Guest
Looking at these two they seem to be the same except for the power amp for the bass driver. Am I looking at this right if so the vista seems to be a great value.
Brick built rooms hold bass better? not in my experience...comment on where the Vista was placed wrt to the Vantage....how far away from both the side and back walls...thanks Alan.AlanBstone said:Just got back from my dealer auditioning the Vista against the Vantage. In that room I much preferred the (wait for it - oops) Vista. Remember in the UK the brick built rooms do hold the bass better. The Vista just sounded more airy whereas, dare I say, the Vantage sounded more like a dynamic speaker. I know that is sacrilege for ML Owners but MY ears told me they were almost like my JM Lab 927be's. The Vista was a revelation!!
Certainly that's a good A-B comparison thenAlanBstone said:Both speakers were placed in the same place (auditioned separately). They were about 5' from the back wall and 4' from the side walls and 8 - 9 ' apart with very good Krell amplification and Copland CD (balanced connection) with Transparent speaker cable.
In my experience, the placement of the sub/mains is more important than the type of walls. Subs/bass produce very long wavelengths; standing waves and cancellation seem to be the biggest problem which is dependent on the size and type of room. I agree that hard brick walls cause more reflection, but that usually leads to room treatment required for the higher frequencies. Hmmm...I'm not sure about most US equipment being bass heavy...have you measured that?AlanBstone said:American homes with their non-brick walls DO lose bass which is why most US equipment is 'bass heavy' to compensate.
I not sure it is that far fetched the speakers are almost identical except for the power amp for the bass. So depending on your preference on bass I could see it.Joey_V said:Somehow I have a hard time believing that the Vistas are superior to the Vantage - especially on the basis of "air". The Vantage have a powered woofer, which displaces some of that amp draw, and the panel is completely free of cabinet colorations (cabinet behind part of the panel).
I think, what you heard was mismanaged bass integration in the room - which made the Vantage sound slower or less airy than the less bass-extending Vistas.
Taz said:I not sure it is that far fetched the speakers are almost identical except for the power amp for the bass. So depending on your preference on bass I could see it.
Audiophiliac said:I think it may have more to do with room interaction and response. Bass frequencies are very easy to screw up in different rooms. And depending on how the bass driver(s) load the room and the dimensions of the room, and speaker and listener placement, I could see someone coming to such a conclusion. Mess ups in the bass region can ruin the whole spectrum and trash an otherwise marvelous setup.
I would think the mids and highs on the Vantage would be better then the Vista, considering the Vantages built in mono amps would take a load off your main amp. The only load your main amp would have to deal with would be the ESL panel.Taz said:I not sure it is that far fetched the speakers are almost identical except for the power amp for the bass. So depending on your preference on bass I could see it.
Enter your email address to join: