Vista vs Vantage

[jmschnur]

I had the Clarity before the Vantage. I did not like the bass of the Clarity at all. It was rather boomy and there was not much I could do about it. They were also not very good for the classical music I like.

When I first got the Vantage it also was a bit boomy and somewhat bright when listeing to classical music (try Arrau's rendition of Beethoven's Pathetique for example).

I then adjusted placement, played with the tilt, and the angle facing the listening position, adjusted the bass control on the Vantage down to about -6, and finally uisng a PAA spectrum analyzer added auralex treaments to my room. With a RT60 of 30 and 40hz-16Khz +/- 2 the system sounds truly spectacular. Nor to bright but the keying on the piano is clearly there as is the attack on violin and cello strings or guitar. The bass is not obtrusive but to my ear correct-e.g. Rostropovich Bach Cello Sonatas sound truly wonderful. Jazz is like I am at Snug Harbor (e.g. Astro project) in New Orlean's. The ambience and placement of the instruments is very good. The Manhatten Quartet's rendition of Shostoovich quartets really shows how good these speakers are and how well they can duplicate the concert experience for chamber music.


In HT mode all is works very well too. Macthing of levels is very important as is phasing of all the speakers.

However claissical music is much better in stereo to my ears except perhaps for some DVD operas.


So now I listen to chamber music, jazz, and inamate vocals in my "TV room" with the Vantage's. I listen to most operas in my "listening room" with my B&W 801 series 80.

Joel

 

[DTB300]

I home auditioned the Vista and Vantage and didn't like them. I thought they were tilted up too much on the highs and the bass sounded too accentuated which made them sound like Hi FI and not music. I heard the same thing in several stores. I also think the old line looked better too. the new line seems good for HT, lousy for purist 2 channel.

You need a new "term" for your dislike or description of the new ML products.

When the word HiFi is used it refers to: "High fidelity (or HiFi or hi-fi) is the reproduction of sound and image that is very faithful to the original. Hi-fi aims to achieve minimal or unnoticeable amounts of noise and distortion."

A better expression is your latest one on "...tilted up too much on the highs and the bass sounded too accentuated." Remember when posting on forums, you are not talking face to face with an individual for a better explaination of your statements.

 

[Rik_Rankin]

You need a new "term" for your dislike or description of the new ML products.

When the word HiFi is used it refers to: "High fidelity (or HiFi or hi-fi) is the reproduction of sound and image that is very faithful to the original. Hi-fi aims to achieve minimal or unnoticeable amounts of noise and distortion."

A better expression is your latest one on "...tilted up too much on the highs and the bass sounded too accentuated." Remember when posting on forums, you are not talking face to face with an individual for a better explaination of your statements.

When I use the term HI FI, I a referring to artificial sounding reproduction rather than something that sounds real. A good test is a jazz trio recording. The bass should not overpower the rest of the music. It does not sound real and that's what a lot of systems do

 

[Rik_Rankin]

Ever hear the phrase "If you dont like the heat, stay away from the fire". If you dont like the speakers, stay out of the forum. I can understand if you dont like the newer ML line. Great! There's no need to let those of us who do own them that we purchased lously speakers. Be happy with what you have, and let us enjoy ours. Yes, I know you probably just post like that to get a rise out of us and we feed into it. Be a mentch, and leave us be.

I just happen to prefer the older models. There has to be a reason why Audioport is willing to sell their demo Summits for $6500! just to get rid of them. I am not saying they are horrible; the dealer said that. Personally my favorite ML speaker is one that I don't own. It happens to be the ascent I and I have listened to most including numerous home auditions. I am perferctly happy with what I have so I am not going to trade. I like the fact that the Summit will play louder and with more dynamics. But the nice warm lower mid range is gone in the newer line which I think made them addictive to listen to. The high ended is too bright to not obscure imperfections in most digital recordings; i.e., there is no plesant roll off on the top like there used to be. The new line is better for HT

 

[DTB300]

When I use the term HI FI, I a referring to artificial sounding reproduction rather than something that sounds real. A good test is a jazz trio recording. The bass should not overpower the rest of the music. It does not sound real and that's what a lot of systems do

My point is in regards to the terms used in Audio today, which can be very misleading....warm, cold, sterile, etc. etc. New audio-nuts have a hard time decerning what is being described. When the word "HiFi" is used, the definition that will be looked up means a good sounding system - hence my post in regards to it.

Like I stated before posting in a forum is one of the hardest things to do, as people only read what you type and expressions are lost, and reading into posts is often done.

Dan

 

[DTB300]

I just happen to prefer the older models.

No problem with that...

Why the dealer would sell them off at cost (higher or lower) is only known to the dealer no matter what you are told.

I like the fact that the Summit will play louder and with more dynamics. But the nice warm lower mid range is gone in the newer line which I think made them addictive to listen to. The high ended is too bright to not obscure imperfections in most digital recordings; i.e., there is no plesant roll off on the top like there used to be. The new line is better for HT

Personally I perfer a speaker that shows off everything in a recording, and if the recording is bright-let it play bright, it is is terrible-let it sound terrible, but if it is great-let it sound great.

I understand your reasoning for taming down the high end on some bad digital recordings, but what happens when you have a very good recording, and you tame down the high end?? Now the recording is not sounding as good (compared to what it should sound like) due to it being too rolled off.

Dan

 

[jmschnur]

Quote

"I understand your reasoning for taming down the high end on some bad digital recordings, but what happens when you have a very good recording, and you tame down the high end?? Now the recording is not sounding as good (compared to what it should sound like) due to it being too rolled off."

Exactly-that is what the treble" or tilt level is for in my Lexicon DC-1. It can be adjusted to get the best out of what are not the best recordings. It is essential that a speaker provide the resolution both in time and frequency to render the best recordings they way they were made. So far I have found this to be true for the ML Vantages. Especially for the claasic Jazz recordings from Chet Bake, Miles Davis, John Coltrane etc.

Joel

 

[aliveatfive]

I just happen to prefer the older models. There has to be a reason why Audioport is willing to sell their demo Summits for $6500! just to get rid of them. I am not saying they are horrible; the dealer said that. Personally my favorite ML speaker is one that I don't own. It happens to be the ascent I and I have listened to most including numerous home auditions. I am perferctly happy with what I have so I am not going to trade. I like the fact that the Summit will play louder and with more dynamics. But the nice warm lower mid range is gone in the newer line which I think made them addictive to listen to. The high ended is too bright to not obscure imperfections in most digital recordings; i.e., there is no plesant roll off on the top like there used to be. The new line is better for HT

I owned the Ascent Is and now I own the Summits. There is no comparison. The Summits blow the Ascents away. If you hear a jazz trio and the bass is too prominent, it's in the recording. Where did you hear the Summits? Did you audition them in your own home? Did you take the time to break them in properly? Summits are not necessarily an easy speaker to tame, but once you have, there's no going back. BTW - I do not have radio shack taste or ears. My Summits are driven with about $15,000 worth of electronics. I use a $6,000 universal player, a $4,000 tuner and a turntable set-up in the neighborhood of $10,000. What did you use?

 

[Rik_Rankin]

I owned the Ascent Is and now I own the Summits. There is no comparison. The Summits blow the Ascents away. If you hear a jazz trio and the bass is too prominent, it's in the recording. Where did you hear the Summits? Did you audition them in your own home? Did you take the time to break them in properly? Summits are not necessarily an easy speaker to tame, but once you have, there's no going back. BTW - I do not have radio shack taste or ears. My Summits are driven with about $15,000 worth of electronics. I use a $6,000 universal player, a $4,000 tuner and a turntable set-up in the neighborhood of $10,000. What did you use?

I have Audio Research Tube pre-amp and reference monoblock amps. My cd is a Sony SCD-1 SACD player and VPI TNT 5 TT. I did not have a home audition of the Summits but I did with both the Vista and Vantage. Both were too bassy and bright in my room. I heard the Summit in Austin, Kansas city, and Boca Raton at Sound Advice. I missed the chesty mid range of my sl3 and the high frequencies sounded artificially hyped which made it sound mechanical. They were well broken in. The dealer offered the Summits for $6500 just to get rid of them. If you don't believe me, call Audioport in Overland Park kansas and ask to buy their demo Summits.

 

[aliveatfive]

I have a particular sensitivity to bright speakers. If Summits are properly set up they are definitely not bright. Dealers try to move more stuff when they have larger profit margins. My dealer can't keep Summits in stock. Do you trust everything a dealer says? I don't. When you set Summits up in your room, break them in and drive them with quality electronics, I will state that you are qualified to dislike them. Until then - uh uh.

 

[attyonline]

I don't know, I think he can dislike them if he wants to. However, his dealer sounds like they cannot set up a good speaker in a showroom so I would avoid them. If your experience is based on an incompetent setup, it does not carry much weight for me since my dealer's Summit setup is awesome.

 

[Rik_Rankin]

I don't know, I think he can dislike them if he wants to. However, his dealer sounds like they cannot set up a good speaker in a showroom so I would avoid them. If your experience is based on an incompetent setup, it does not carry much weight for me since my dealer's Summit setup is awesome.

I heard them at 3 different dealers. I personally do not care for the styling. I think they look cheap. The previous model was a much more substantial looking unit

 

[amey01]

Ok Ok........so you don't like the look or the sound of the new line. Great! That is your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Can we move on? Please?

Please stop repeating yourself over and over. We don't need to be told for the 83rd time that it "looks cheap". Can we get this forum back to its healthy friendly state?

 

[Rik_Rankin]

Ok Ok........so you don't like the look or the sound of the new line. Great! That is your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Can we move on? Please?

Please stop repeating yourself over and over. We don't need to be told for the 83rd time that it "looks cheap". Can we get this forum back to its healthy friendly state?

I thought this was an open forum. I won't express my opinion again. ML can make whatever they want and I just won't buy it until it gets better

 

[boutrosa]

Finally he sais someting worth reading.

 

[Taz]

When I heard the Summits they were not bright sounding to me at all. Bright sound can also be a result of the gear. Maybe you need to listen to it with different gear. Also if a dealer is trying to sell $10000 plus speakers and and can not set up the room or have it available with different gear I would seek out a new dealer. IMHO that is a joke and an insult to the consumer.

 

[Rik_Rankin]

Finally he sais someting worth reading.

That was a useful commentary. Thank you very much for your input

 

[Rik_Rankin]

When I heard the Summits they were not bright sounding to me at all. Bright sound can also be a result of the gear. Maybe you need to listen to it with different gear. Also if a dealer is trying to sell $10000 plus speakers and and can not set up the room or have it available with different gear I would seek out a new dealer. IMHO that is a joke and an insult to the consumer.

BUT, you can buy a demo pair for $6500 at Audioport. So much for $10K speakers. Like the dealer actually deserves 4K profits on these units?

 

[Joey_V]

BUT, you can buy a demo pair for $6500 at Audioport. So much for $10K speakers. Like the dealer actually deserves 4K profits on these units?

Irregardless of what the dealer is asking for it, the Summits are $10K speakers. What they deserve in profits is not in question here either. The point is, the dealer needs to take the time to set up a $10K level speaker properly.

You can find them unlistenable, that's fine. Just dont make it a point to continually reiterate this point and calling people names ("tin ears" etc...). Remember, you are on the ML forum, and we are all biased towards ML.... doing so (posting without tact) without tact will just rub us the wrong way.

 

[Rik_Rankin]

Irregardless of what the dealer is asking for it, the Summits are $10K speakers. What they deserve in profits is not in question here either. The point is, the dealer needs to take the time to set up a $10K level speaker properly.

You can find them unlistenable, that's fine. Just dont make it a point to continually reiterate this point and calling people names ("tin ears" etc...). Remember, you are on the ML forum, and we are all biased towards ML.... doing so (posting without tact) without tact will just rub us the wrong way.

Irregardless is a word that many people mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. The word was coined in the United States in the early 20th century, probably from a blend of irrespective and regardless. Perhaps this is why some critics insist that there is “no such word” as irregardless, a charge they would not think of leveling at a nonstandard word with a longer history, such as ain’t. Since people use irregardless, it is undoubtedly a word. But it has never been accepted in Standard English and is usually changed by editors to regardless before getting into print.