Anybody Heard Tyler Acoustic Woodmeres?

Other than lack of bass extention, what don't you like about the sound of your 988s? I have 989s and LOVE them. They play a little louder overall than the 988s and have another half-octave or so of bass extention and power. IOW, in the bottom 2 octaves, at the same bass frequency the 989s have a bit more energy (and in the bottom octave, significantly more energy) than the 988s. You already own one of the finest-souding--coherent, transparent, relatively uncolored, spacious, etc.) loudspeakers in the world (within their limits). I believe it'll be very difficult to find a coned speaker with lots-better bass power AND the transparency and coherency of the Quads.

I also believe that MANY of us will disagree with me! :-)
.

Kjl: "The Quad 988 does offer much. But it is missing dynamic contrasts. They also smooth out drums and tambourines . For instance, in a Tchaikovsky piece "Capricio Italien", there are many instances where the tamborines when hit are softened on the top and the attack of the instrument is compromised. I've heard the piece live ad heard it on a pair of B&W's. In short, perhaps, I can find a speaker with the slam of a dynamic speaker and the beauty of a Quad. The Quad is superlative with a single voice, piano and a small chamber group. But it in no way can convince me that there could be 80-90 people on stage. By the way, I also have the Audio Physics Minos Subwoofer and this makes my Quads much more listenable. Without the sub, the soundstage and bottom end just collapses. I was thinking of auditioning the Vandersteen 5A, the Hyperion 938, in short I am looking for something more than I currently have. I hope that I won't have to give up anything to enjoy the music more."
.