Over the past 30 years or so, I tried horn, electrostatic and ribbon speakers. In the end, I went right back to conventional, cone-in-a-box speakers, and for the same reasons described here in the review. Great review.
Good Review Tom! I especially appreciated the comparison/benefits from the speakers in the $25-$100K/$100-$25K and what you DO get from investing in the M7 price range.
"Quasi rational" is putting it mildly. The idea these speakers legitimately add $340,000 worth of sound value over the KEF Blade One META is likely irrational. I say this, having not heard the M7's but punching anywhere near that much above KEF's flagship in 2024 seems a dubious task from an audio engineering perspective.
We have requested the Blades for review. Denominating the value of performance gains, if any, is in the wallet of the beholder. But one can always hope that the Blades are outstanding.
Like cars, the last 0.1 second quicker acceleration can cost a lot more, but they are obviously not multiple times as quick, but if you are into it, i mean yeah obviously why not, I think it's about your sensory requirements really
@@TASmagazine I think this market of speakers exists to extract money from those with more money than sense, but maybe it's my "experienced" ears that can't hear this special thing companies like Wilson and Magico are creating.
@@kenhiett5266I think you may be saying that because you cannot afford them and may have a different outlook if you actually could and owned such speakers.
First and foremost, Tom, I really appreciate your attempts at vivid articulation in your reviews. They are usually most informative and you've really developed a knack at making them interesting for informed audiophiles. In the case of this review (immediately following your discussion of "vivid"), you begin describing sound qualities that are so dependent upon listening rooms, equipment set-up, and recordings being played back, it is hard to delineate how much of your superlatives actually relate to the speakers themselves. No doubt these are very fine speakers and I'm not attempting to impugn in any manner. I'm really just saying that 1) at the high-end, systems become more and more dependent upon the recordings they are playing back, associated equipment and they rooms they are playing in and 2) you would really have to be able to calibrate with your own listening room and familiar recordings in order to assign superlatives to the speakers themselves. Please keep up the good work! I enjoy your reviews!
These are all issues, certainly. "The problem of recording standards" is one of our 6 major issues facing audio. That said, the number of good recordings is impressively large. The associated equipment helps with the results for sure, but my experience is that particular equipment is less critical to the results I describe than the basic quality level of the supporting gear. I'm working on a project in this area, but so far I'm finding streamers that are at a level of goodness where I could live with most of them, and DACs that are in the same boat, and amps that are like this, etc. Sure, I might prefer one over another (and you might prefer a different one), but "electronic signal purity" has evolved to a point where, at the high end, different good products aren't make or break as far as believability goes. The same is not true of speakers or rooms. I think room treatment and room correction are one of the final audio frontiers, though that is partially due to reservations audio listeners seem to have about room treatment, coupled with the need for professional design service (people seem to dislike paying for services). For a speaker like the M7, I cover it under the assumption that the user will have a well-treated room. Under that assumption, I think what I've reported will hold up pretty well across rooms. My room and Magico's room are different in treatment, but they sound quite similar in many ways because the basic principles being applied are the same and aimed at similar calibration. Hope that helps.
I subscribed to TAS and others back in the '90s, and just recently resubbed to them and Stereophile. Back then there was some equipment that seemed extremely expensive to me and well beyond my means, but I enjoyed reading about it, and many of the other things I actually had a chance to own if I worked it right. But now it has gone beyond ludicrous with things like these speakers. This isn't for audiophiles, it's for multi-millionaires or even billionaires who can wipe their butts with $100 bills and brag about their equipment. I don't normally approve of people complaining about cost with a sour grapes attitude, but I don't care how much you sugar coat it in these reviews this stuff is just pretentious vanity bullshit.
Yep. I 100% agree. $375,000 a pair is ridiculous and obscene. Even if I was a billionaire, I would not consider wasting my money on a scam. A fool and his money are....
Tom please consider a video expanding the "believability" factor and the associated recommended equipment. Perhaps these would be indicators for what to hope to achieve for us from a more experienced listener. Thank you.
Good idea. It isn't complicated, so here is the short version. We use the sound of real instruments in real space (the absolute sound) as a reference for evaluating equipment (we aren't tell ing you what we like, we are telling you what things sound like). This reference is used because over the decades we have found that getting closer to this reference gives better musical satisfaction. For a long time, we referred to the objective of audio at home as being "accurate reproduction". But we can't exactly know this, because we don't know the exact placement of performers or the exact settings of their amps or the exact instruments they play etc. But knowing the sound of real instruments in real space, we can pretty well judge when stereo delivers a 'believable' version of real instruments in real space. 'Believable' then just means the sound has no obvious distracting distortions that tell you it is being reproduced badly. The equipment sounds like it's sound might be real or accurate (and, again, we can't know accuracy exactly). This is a model for a system (stereo at home) that aims at identifying ~large distortions. Of which there are many. For more, see our Methodology paper in the Audiopedia section of The Absolute Sound website.
Tom I sure enjoyed your well done video and your thorough explanations. I don’t see myself popping 300 K for the speakers or a Lamborghini for that matter as the real cost would be from the divorce court. Thanks keep up the good work
Interesting to hear about like a super car is. I wonder how something like Vivid audio would compare with less money spend in the cabinet but with a different approach. Anyway am 100% in the horn camp now but think about buying a wide dispersion speakers (magico, Vivid) as a second pair from time to time.
Only people with extreme incomes can afford speakers like this. And to each their own. I would.prefer an approxi- mately $7500 to $10,000 speaker mated with 2 $3500 to $5000 subs and I dont think Id be far off any $50k and up all in one setup. Am just as happy with a $35-40k total system. And thats been a life long process to acheive.
It's not. What matters is connecting more emotionally with the music and liking the appearance of the equipment. Measurements do not matter; you can't measure soundstage.
Tom: This is perhaps your most revealing speaker review. I would absolutely want to listen to your words again (maybe twice) BEFORE auditioning the M7's. Your comparisons of different speaker designs (electrostatic, box, ribbon, etc.) is revealing as well. Can Alon Wolf walk on water? I kinda get that impression.
Actually, if Alon has a secret, it is that he and his team are pretty resolutely focused on designing speakers with low distortion as perceived at the ear/brain, boring though that may sound. Then he would add "it helps to have large budget for the resulting product so that you can consider all sorts of engineering solutions." There are others who do the science part, so maybe the walk on water accolade should be reserved for those who do so much at lower price points.
These speakers cost $375,000. And a Porsche 911 GT3 RS costs $375,000. For the same price, I would buy the Porsche. There is no comparison to the intense thrill of a flagship Porsche and a speaker! 🤔 And the Porsche will appreciate in value, while the speakers will depreciate! This is an easy decision.
@TASmagazine It's amusing to dream large, but in my final decisions I usually return to being a modest hick from the sticks. If I were to buy a Porsche, it would be a 718 GTS because it's 9/10ths of the performance at half the price. And Magnepans are like that too. Also my ears detest the sound of boxes so much that I've developed a phobia of box speakers. Transparency is my goal. 😊
@TASmagazine I enjoy your way with words. I wonder if your writing flows easily for you, or if you rethink and juggle the various possible combinations of words. I'm a juggler and I wish it flowed easily. I often think about Mrs. Buehrer, who was my 9th grade english teacher. It felt like she was picking on me because she relentlessly corrected everything I wrote! But she was a great teacher, and I would love to tell her how much I appreciate her! If you have the time, it would be nice to know how you learned to write so well. Maybe you had someone like my Mrs. Buehrer. 😊
Over the past 30 years or so, I tried horn, electrostatic and ribbon speakers. In the end, I went right back to conventional, cone-in-a-box speakers, and for the same reasons described here in the review. Great review.
Good Review Tom!
I especially appreciated the comparison/benefits from the speakers in the $25-$100K/$100-$25K and what you DO get from investing in the M7 price range.
"Quasi rational" is putting it mildly. The idea these speakers legitimately add $340,000 worth of sound value over the KEF Blade One META is likely irrational. I say this, having not heard the M7's but punching anywhere near that much above KEF's flagship in 2024 seems a dubious task from an audio engineering perspective.
We have requested the Blades for review. Denominating the value of performance gains, if any, is in the wallet of the beholder. But one can always hope that the Blades are outstanding.
The KEF's probably measure better.
Like cars, the last 0.1 second quicker acceleration can cost a lot more, but they are obviously not multiple times as quick, but if you are into it, i mean yeah obviously why not, I think it's about your sensory requirements really
@@TASmagazine I think this market of speakers exists to extract money from those with more money than sense, but maybe it's my "experienced" ears that can't hear this special thing companies like Wilson and Magico are creating.
@@kenhiett5266I think you may be saying that because you cannot afford them and may have a different outlook if you actually could and owned such speakers.
The construction seems to have a lot in common with large Rockport Technologies speakers.
First and foremost, Tom, I really appreciate your attempts at vivid articulation in your reviews. They are usually most informative and you've really developed a knack at making them interesting for informed audiophiles. In the case of this review (immediately following your discussion of "vivid"), you begin describing sound qualities that are so dependent upon listening rooms, equipment set-up, and recordings being played back, it is hard to delineate how much of your superlatives actually relate to the speakers themselves. No doubt these are very fine speakers and I'm not attempting to impugn in any manner. I'm really just saying that 1) at the high-end, systems become more and more dependent upon the recordings they are playing back, associated equipment and they rooms they are playing in and 2) you would really have to be able to calibrate with your own listening room and familiar recordings in order to assign superlatives to the speakers themselves.
Please keep up the good work! I enjoy your reviews!
These are all issues, certainly. "The problem of recording standards" is one of our 6 major issues facing audio. That said, the number of good recordings is impressively large. The associated equipment helps with the results for sure, but my experience is that particular equipment is less critical to the results I describe than the basic quality level of the supporting gear. I'm working on a project in this area, but so far I'm finding streamers that are at a level of goodness where I could live with most of them, and DACs that are in the same boat, and amps that are like this, etc. Sure, I might prefer one over another (and you might prefer a different one), but "electronic signal purity" has evolved to a point where, at the high end, different good products aren't make or break as far as believability goes. The same is not true of speakers or rooms. I think room treatment and room correction are one of the final audio frontiers, though that is partially due to reservations audio listeners seem to have about room treatment, coupled with the need for professional design service (people seem to dislike paying for services). For a speaker like the M7, I cover it under the assumption that the user will have a well-treated room. Under that assumption, I think what I've reported will hold up pretty well across rooms. My room and Magico's room are different in treatment, but they sound quite similar in many ways because the basic principles being applied are the same and aimed at similar calibration. Hope that helps.
For that money I have the Kharma speakers.
Absolutely! Kharma Extreme Exquisite Grand 3.0 is far better than M7…… amazing speaker
It would be interesting to hear you compare it to the Wilson XVX
TM may visit RH to hear the XVX under similarly good conditions. He has a lot on his plate, though.
I subscribed to TAS and others back in the '90s, and just recently resubbed to them and Stereophile. Back then there was some equipment that seemed extremely expensive to me and well beyond my means, but I enjoyed reading about it, and many of the other things I actually had a chance to own if I worked it right. But now it has gone beyond ludicrous with things like these speakers. This isn't for audiophiles, it's for multi-millionaires or even billionaires who can wipe their butts with $100 bills and brag about their equipment. I don't normally approve of people complaining about cost with a sour grapes attitude, but I don't care how much you sugar coat it in these reviews this stuff is just pretentious vanity bullshit.
Yep. I 100% agree. $375,000 a pair is ridiculous and obscene. Even if I was a billionaire, I would not consider wasting my money on a scam. A fool and his money are....
Now that's the definition of sour grapes right here folks
@@A-gks
So apparently your comment is the definition of a fool and his money.
Tom please consider a video expanding the "believability" factor and the associated recommended equipment. Perhaps these would be indicators for what to hope to achieve for us from a more experienced listener. Thank you.
Good idea. It isn't complicated, so here is the short version. We use the sound of real instruments in real space (the absolute sound) as a reference for evaluating equipment (we aren't tell ing you what we like, we are telling you what things sound like). This reference is used because over the decades we have found that getting closer to this reference gives better musical satisfaction. For a long time, we referred to the objective of audio at home as being "accurate reproduction". But we can't exactly know this, because we don't know the exact placement of performers or the exact settings of their amps or the exact instruments they play etc. But knowing the sound of real instruments in real space, we can pretty well judge when stereo delivers a 'believable' version of real instruments in real space. 'Believable' then just means the sound has no obvious distracting distortions that tell you it is being reproduced badly. The equipment sounds like it's sound might be real or accurate (and, again, we can't know accuracy exactly). This is a model for a system (stereo at home) that aims at identifying ~large distortions. Of which there are many. For more, see our Methodology paper in the Audiopedia section of The Absolute Sound website.
Tom I sure enjoyed your well done video and your thorough explanations.
I don’t see myself popping 300 K for the speakers or a Lamborghini for that matter as the real cost would be from the divorce court.
Thanks keep up the good work
Yeah, skipping the divorce seems like a smart move.
Interesting to hear about like a super car is.
I wonder how something like Vivid audio would compare with less money spend in the cabinet but with a different approach.
Anyway am 100% in the horn camp now but think about buying a wide dispersion speakers (magico, Vivid) as a second pair from time to time.
Only people with extreme incomes can afford speakers like this. And to each their own. I would.prefer an approxi- mately $7500 to $10,000 speaker mated with 2 $3500 to $5000 subs and I dont think Id be far off any $50k and up all in one setup. Am just as happy with a $35-40k total system. And thats been a life long process to acheive.
Well, Beolab 90 go down to 12 Hz (M7 to 18hz) and costs $200k less. Beolab can play up to 126db, M7 to 120dB, if thats important for someone......
It's not. What matters is connecting more emotionally with the music and liking the appearance of the equipment. Measurements do not matter; you can't measure soundstage.
Tom: This is perhaps your most revealing speaker review. I would absolutely want to listen to your words again (maybe twice) BEFORE auditioning the M7's. Your comparisons of different speaker designs (electrostatic, box, ribbon, etc.) is revealing as well. Can Alon Wolf walk on water? I kinda get that impression.
Actually, if Alon has a secret, it is that he and his team are pretty resolutely focused on designing speakers with low distortion as perceived at the ear/brain, boring though that may sound. Then he would add "it helps to have large budget for the resulting product so that you can consider all sorts of engineering solutions." There are others who do the science part, so maybe the walk on water accolade should be reserved for those who do so much at lower price points.
Auditioned M2's order 20.7s
Played Monica "So Gone"
Dealer turned song 🎵 off
The 20.7s are very nice.
Superlative magico loudspeakers.
What did you think of focal Stella utopia em Evo?
Andre Jennings gave it a Golden Ear Award in 2024. His coverage is on The Absolute Sound website.
@TASmagazine thanks for replying and opinion.
@TASmagazine how do I go to absolute sound website. Thanks 🙏
@ www dot theabsolutesound dot com
@TASmagazine thanks
These speakers cost $375,000.
And a Porsche 911 GT3 RS costs $375,000. For the same price, I would buy the Porsche. There is no comparison to the intense thrill of a flagship Porsche and a speaker! 🤔
And the Porsche will appreciate in value, while the speakers will depreciate! This is an easy decision.
Then the smart move would seem to be to buy the GT3 RS and use the capital gain to fund speakers?
@TASmagazine It's amusing to dream large, but in my final decisions I usually return to being a modest hick from the sticks. If I were to buy a Porsche, it would be a 718 GTS because it's 9/10ths of the performance at half the price.
And Magnepans are like that too. Also my ears detest the sound of boxes so much that I've developed a phobia of box speakers. Transparency is my goal. 😊
@TASmagazine
I enjoy your way with words.
I wonder if your writing flows easily for you, or if you rethink and juggle the various possible combinations of words. I'm a juggler and I wish it flowed easily.
I often think about Mrs. Buehrer, who was my 9th grade english teacher. It felt like she was picking on me because she relentlessly corrected everything I wrote! But she was a great teacher, and I would love to tell her how much I appreciate her!
If you have the time, it would be nice to know how you learned to write so well. Maybe you had someone like my Mrs. Buehrer. 😊
375k gtfo
I am waiting for Tesla to make speaker drivers, they should be able to come up with something crazy XD