And the A/B/C/Ding begins

I've already written fairly extensive thoughts on some of the speakers I own (or have owned) and with some encouragement to do some careful listening before selling part of my collection I'll continue the trend now, for any that are interested.

The better half of my current collection, left to right: Dahlquist DQ-20i, Teledyne AR-9LS, Infinity Kappa 6.1 series II, Cerwin Vega DX-9:



The big question mark in my mind was how the ARs and the CVs would match up, being the big bass kings in my collection, especially since I'd never heard them A/B'd and now had a dedicated amp that could feed them properly. The CVs have also been in storage for a month(?) and might have faded from current memory a bit.

Some quick stats:

NOTE: I still have yet to undertake the LS"i" modification to the ARs.

In my "shootout" we listened to both speakers manually A/B'd through an Adcom 5500 two channel amp (350wpc@4ohms) with a quite new (and quite run-of-the-mill) Yamaha 663 home theater receiver acting as pre/pro. Speaker wire was equal 10' lengths of Canare 4s11 terminated in raw twist at the amp and a PAIR of gold plated (generic) banana clips at the speakers (neither speaker is equipped for biamp/biwire). Interconnects were a fairly inexpensive but heavy gauge generic and the music itself was mostly conveyed by my Roku Soundbridge via Monster premium RCAs relying on the Roku's DACs over the Yamaha's. Format was primarily Slimserver running the latest FLAC codec and transcoding native lossless FLAC to 320kbs mp3s. All music was played using the Yammy in "Direct" mode which supposedly sends the signal on the shortest path, bypassing any DSP, equalization or other "unnecessary" circuits. We were careful to try and honestly match the two for volume as the AR9LS is quite a bit less efficient. Both my wife, our son, and a coworker (and fledgling audiophile) were present for most of the tests.

One of the first things I noticed, to CVs credit perhaps, is that grill cloth DOES make a difference! I noticed this first actually with my Infinity Kappas on the first really good listen they got. Like the Kappas the ARs share this trait... removing the grills really brightens things up, even to the casual listener who just happened to be passing through. This change was almost non-evident in the CVs, remaining quite similar with the grills on or off. I'm not saying that I prefer either "mode" over the other at this point, only that the change was much more dramatic with the ARs than I had expected.

I've been switching back and forth between the two for a couple of days now but on one night in particular we did nothing but listen to music with a close attention to detail and differences for 6+ hours. I won't go into a full playlist but I will say that equivalency (or deficit) between the two, particularly in the bass regions, had a lot to do with the tracks that were selected.

One aspect we agreed on was that the AR had a superior soundstage which we both gave credit to the actual physical design... The ARs are quite a bit taller and thus also put the tweets and mids at a higher elevation as well... from a sitting position, perhaps 10 feet from the front of the speakers, the ARs simply conveyed a better listening experience, placing the tweets in particular above ear level, perhaps 12" above the tweets in the DX9s. This helped place the different instruments and vocals quite well and they have an obvious advantage as such.

The AR9LS was also much less picky about lateral placement, another surprise for me. With a combined weight of just over 400lbs we didn't spend much time shifting the two pair of speakers in an A/B position either, although they DID get moved, and more than once. It was noticeable that the DX9s, a speaker I had always thought of as "room filling", had an obviously smaller "sweet spot". The AR9LS sounded very good no matter which of the two positions they were placed in... the Cerwin Vega DX9s, not so much? I know that both of these speakers would benefit from a larger room with more attention to treatment, but in our impromptu listening environment the AR9LS were certainly the most placement friendly as well.

Down to the bass! In general I find these two much more difficult to choose between than I had expected! I've always been a fan of the DX9s but in the last couple of years my wife has been their big standard bearer so I took particular interest in what she thought of them A/B'd. One of the most important comments she made (to me anyway) was that the ARs were "also very good speakers" and she would not make such a compliment lightly. Both had such clean and powerful bass that it was often difficult to tell which speaker was being played. This was a bit surprising to me as I really didn't think the AR9LS, with it's two smaller bass woofers would be quite as capable as the DX9s when reproducing cello, kettle drum, pipe organ, and other notable bass instruments. One song in particular, "Crucify" from Tori Amos' "Little Earthquakes", an album I prize quite highly just for it's exemplary production, has a very powerful bass drum (kettle drum?) throughout the song. I was astonished at how well the AR9LS could replicate this sound and in fact only subtle nuances could pick it out from the DX9s playing back the same recording. I know the ARs are rated with a lower freq. response than the DX9s but as I suspected the 15" woofers in the CVs allowed them to perform quite adequately below their rated specs (I've actually demo'd the Cerwin Vega DX-9s with a series of recordings designed to "burn in" car subwoofers and an audible, and respectable, 20 Hz is not outside their grasp!) If anything the AR9LS was superior by a narrow margin, producing a more detailed and seamless blend of both the low freqs and the mids on this particular track.

I preferred the mids (again) on the AR9LS on several YES tracks (thanks again for making me a junky, Scott) including "Leave It" and the classic anthem "Owner of a Lonely Heart". Both pair of speakers pulled the bass out spectacularly but the vocals and higher end transients just seemed a bit crisper and more forward on the AR9LS. Woodwinds and vocals, the end of the intro to "Leave It" (20 seconds or so) , seemed to convey even the sound of the musician's lips separating with a more profound realism. Only one song, one of my "reference" tracks, Dire Straits' "Money for Nothing", did the CVs have the upper hand and only because their obvious higher efficiency let them play cleanly at an insane level (+6db on the Yammy) before the Adcom's distortion warning lights started flickering. The ARs didn't suck at this, by any means, but if I had to play that song back for a gymnasium full of party people at the loudest "clean" db levels the DX9s are what I would want with me.

All in all I am still fond of both speakers although at this point (as I always suspected, deep inside), I would choose the AR9LS over the DX9 without a moment of hesitation. Some of my leaning towards the ARs is certainly their relative exotic construction and appearance, as well as their rarity, but I can still recommend the Cerwin Vega DX-9s (or similar later model) to the discriminating listener, especially since they seem to be much more in abundance and can be had for roughly half the price.

This post has been edited by Oktyabr on April 02, 2009 05:24 pm

very good review John. now you'll need to throw the DQ-20's (augmented with a sub) into the mix. if i were to hazard a guess i'd say that they would take the top spot overall. another complete guess is that upgrading the 9's to Lsi's would make them contenders again.

as to your results i am a bit surprised that the 9's were less finicky with placement, but as you say that could be just the room. the other surprise is your findings of how the grills affect the sound of the 9's as i've never noticed this with the classic 9's. oh yeah, as for Yes, you're welcome.

That's my suspicion as well. Even against the AR9LS the DQs are incredibly realistic sounding. They (the DQs) seem to always pull a "Wow." out of not only myself but my buddy Dan when he listens (which he has been doing a lot lately) and would certainly be one of the last pair of speakers I'd sell if I had to. As it stands right now I think probably the way most of you that have been following my reviews would, the ARs and the DQs are the keepers! We'll see though...

I am really hesitant to base a review on any speaker augmented by a sub though... my M&K is one of the most musical subs I've ever owned (I've had more than a few) but it becomes so subjective due not only to the potentials induced by different brands and models of subs but how they are tuned. More so when you try to compare a sub-accented speaker to one that is not. Still, there is nothing wrong with just relaxing with a cold brew on the couch and throwing some music on. Just not sure if I can write a "fair" review!

After reading my review my wife had this to add (unedited!):

And there you have it.

This post has been edited by Oktyabr on April 02, 2009 06:48 pm

in my way of thinking there is nothing unfair about trying to get the best sound possible with the equipment you have. i dont know for sure that the DQ's were designed to be used with sub, but the low end is the only area where they could be said to be lacking so it seems like a natural progression. if the M&K can be tuned to compliment the sound of the DQ's...... as you said, wow!

Great review. I've heard the DX9 and the AR9 but not the AR9LS, which I imagine is an improvement over the original. The DX9 was about BIG SOUND and gobs of bass, which the oversized cabinet is certainly capable of. I didn't find them to be particularly audiophile or pleasant for that matter but maybe it was the smallish apartment I heard them in. The AR9 had too many drivers to be particularly accurate. I imagine keeping all those woofers in phase is a nightmare and the ill defined sound reflects this.

First of all congrats all speakers have incredible looks.
I never listen to any of them but your review is so detailled in every major aspect that i feel that i was listen to them...
Looking forward for your Dahlquist DQ-20i review. Tanx for sharing.

what about running my adcom gfa 555 in Mono block mode? I got that other adcom just sitting here?

do you want to give it a shot?

great write up.

elroy

I haven't forgotten your 555! I think I'd maybe like to own it if you were inclined to sell. The problem with mono-blocking however is that the 5500 won't bridge! Would still be neat to bi-amp at least my DQs with it.

Thanks for the compliments guys!

ya, we can make something happen. will talk to you soon.

elroy

The Cerwin Vega DX9s found a new home tonight! I got most of what I was asking but still not sure if I'm happy about the sale or not... I think the DQs will go back in