Coincident is primarily sold factory direct with only 2 authorized dealers worldwide, therefore, it is pretty hard to demo the speakers. Many are hesitant on dropping serious $$ on speakers that you cannot audition. Wilson, on the other hand, has an extensive dealer network.
All the reviews are raves as it should be since it is so simple using state of the art parts and simple xover. So simple in fact that you can make a better verion for much, much less. Buy two Accuton $900 mids, two $360 Accuton tweets, buy two caps, two coils and get Danny Richies (GR Reearch) servo 12 inch woofs for the bottom (use open baffle or closed). Three of his 12s driven by the separate servo amp would kick butt and you could time align them with the mids and highs. Use no binding posts and put the simple xover for the mids/highs outside the box. Use even more dead box material (constrained layer high density MDF, 13 ply birch plywood or even bamboo plywood). You can use green glue between the layers. Would cost around $5500 and you could make it look anyway you wanted. Would be mucho superior to stock Coincident. The bass would be so deep and low it would shake the house. Please google Dannies servo woof system....he showed a speaker using 3 12s at the Rocky Mountain show.....best bass at the show according to several.
If you wanted to get even more crazy then use two mids and tweets per channel and you will now have at least 96db sensitivity and the coil for the woofs would be half the value so even more info would go into them. Go to high-endaudio.com and read that guys stacking and biamping them. Even a single version would be bi-amped. Doubling the drivers would give even more.
I am lucky as I live in NYC and one of the dealers is in Manhattan. I am curious to hear from people who have heard these speakers to see if there is a good reason to stop by and give them a listen. I probably will anyway....but would love to hear fro you all. Thanks!
RWD, i heard the Coincident Pure Reference Extreme at the NY audio show last April. I wish you went.
The Coincident Pure Reference Extreme speakers were played on the top of the line Coincident tube amps and tube preamp.
If i remember correctly the CD player used was the TEAC Esoteric K-01
The speakers don't look as fancy as the Wilson speakers, but he Coincident Pure Reference Extreme sounded amazing.
The bass blended in so nicely to the mids.
The speakers sounded very silky and the bass was tight and upbeat.
I was at the NY show as well, and I thought the PRs were one of the best sounds I heard. Then again, I am partial to high-efficiency speakers combined with SET amps. There are many who favor the low-sensitivity high-power solid state systems who may prefer the Wilsons, or Magicos or Kharmas or....
The sound of he Coincident room at the NY Show was excellent. No complaints. And this is from a high powered tube amp/Wilson guy
Thank you all for some very candid comments!! Keep 'em coming!
Just looked at your system. Very very nice. If the system reflects your current taste, then you may still prefer Wilson/Audio Research and/or VTL.
Rick you need to move your speakers further apart and away from that rear wall.
Hi JWM......actually my speakers are quite far out into the room (3-4 feet?) but you're correct about the separation. I actually can't move then anymore since they would be blocking the front door. I sit approx. 6-8 feet from the main speakers. I toyed with the idea of putting them on the long wall which would allow me more separation but I'd be much closer to the mains then (3-5'). Believe it or not the stage presentation is quite good but that's for your good advice!!!!
Hi all....hi Gpgr4blu...Thanks for the compliment on my system. I made some changes and never updated the photos or description. My main amps are 2 (two) MacIntosh 275 running mono. My pre amp is a Calyspo and my TT is the TWR Raven AC1 with a Tri-Planer arm and a Dynavector DR1 cartridge.
The Coincident PRE has a wonderful lively sound and would be very easy to love. They dont have the dead cabinet sound that most of the competition has. My comments are based on a brief review at the 2011 RMAF so take that into account.
Hi Bob...can you explain a bit more what you mean about the "dead cabinet" sound? Is this an asset to you or not? Just curious. Tks!
That's an astute sonic observation regarding the distinction between
speaker design philosophy. I can appreciate the theory of having a very
inert " dead" cabinet, less resonance, distortion, coloration etc.
Successful execution with musically involving sound is another story.
Some speakers built on the inert cabinet principle can unfortunately sound
dull, flat, lifeless (ironically dead sounding). Lacking the realistic tone,
vibrancy and sense of liveliness and emotional connection with music.
The PRE does avoid this pitfall and is very alive and engaging with much
Based on my listening experiences an example of a inert cabinet speaker
that implemented this approach successfully and sounds musically alive
and involving is the Rockport line (at least the one I heard).
To be fair I readily acknowledge that some other listeners would prefer the
more damped "dead" sound and not the livelier sound that
appeals to me.
Rwd, the Vandersteen 7s, Kharmas, MBLs and my own Salk SoundScapes have thick cabinets that give a character to the sound that is different from the Electrovoice EV6s that I have in my bedroom. Since I am so familiar with the dead sound, I immediately noticed that it wasnt present with the PREs. I would imagine that most people wouldnt be able to identify it since it is pretty subtle. I personally would probably go for a dead cabinet, but the nice liveliness of the PREs is very intoxicating.
I heard the Coincident room at the New York Audio Show and thought it was the second best room there. (The LessLoss room with Kaiser Kawero speakers was the best room, but the speakers were impractically big and a lot more expensive.) Coincident PRE are not "stunning" in an audiophile sense the way, for example, Raidho or Wilson speakers are. To me, those speakers sound impressive in the first few minutes and then have me reaching for Advil. To me the PRE sound very natural and provide an emotional connection to the music that set them apart. They are also much more extended and resolving than Audio Note and Spendor, for example. I would definitely go to hear them, but plan to spend a while listening, as their positive attributes only emerge after you have heard them for awhile.
"Then have me reaching for advil" beautifully said, I know all too well what you mean.
Your description/distinction of the contrast between the speakers you mention is on the mark in my opinion. Natural vs hifi two different routes for sure. Nice post.
I heard the Kaiser Kawero with the Concert Fidelity components at RMAF 2011 and it was stunningly good! Very natural presentation and realistic, similar to what Coincident sounds like with proper set up. These type of speakers are the antithesis of analytical, clinical and sterile yet offer superb resolution and exquisite nuance with the emotion left intact. Mcondon it seems our ears are pretty similar.
I just added a question on another thread "Vandersteens vs Sonus Faber Stradivarius Homage. Answer here or there. Sorry for the confusion.... :)
Accuracy and window to source=Vandersteen
Beauty with a bit of technicolor shading=Sonus Faber
I assume you are comparing Vandy 7s with Strads but my summary would apply across the board with Vandys and Sonus at similar price points. Vandy 7s have the extra benefit of a spectacular low end with a powered amp built in. Strads and most other stand alone speakers can't touch the Vandy low end slam.
Sorry Gpgrblu...I meant the Vandersteens 5A's. My speakers for the last 30 years have been the Infinity RS 1B's. I was just curious to see how the Coincident PR Extream's and the Vandersteen 5A's would match up with my speakers. Thanks for your thoughtful comment!!!