Kharma 3.2 to MidiGrand Upgade???


Anyone have experience in upgrading from the 3.2 CRM enigma to the Midi Grand Ceramiques w enigma?

What improvements/benefits can be had and you've experienced? Very interested in what is possible with low powered tube amps, specifically Lamm ML2.1's etc.

On paper the Midis are more efficient. Are they easier to drive than the 3.2's or does their impedance dip more significantly than with the 2 ways? Also interested in feedback regarding room size, bass integration, etc.

I'm interested also in any comments regarding the new ceramique sub and if its necessary / integrates well with the midis. I am seeking to be able to reach realistic symphonic levels with content loaded classical music and heavy electronica.
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xowl

Showing 7 responses by howie

Rcupka, I think marketing is very important and if anything, Tenor probably didn't do a good enough job of marketing. But their restructuring is apparantly complete and slowly but hopefully surely, they'll be back up.
There are a few owners and previous owners of 3.2s who have moved up to the Midis and there are many who have heard both extensively but I'm not one of them. :P From what I know, they've mostly been happy with the move, but then again, they were looking for more bass output and higher SPLs.

I bought the 3.2s because I couldn't afford the Midis, but I probably made the right choice for my room. The 3.2s are more flexible in placement as they can be placed close to the front wall and sound just as coherent and disappear just as easily as if it was further out. The Midis on the other hand would need to be further away from the front wall.

All things being equal, the 3.2s are going to integrate better than the Midis. The Midis try to integrate as well as the 3.2s while providing the output down low. That's how I think of it. If you have a relatively large sized room and looking for realistic symphonic levels, then you probably would want bigger speakers and also a more powerful amp.

As for the sub, I'll be perpetually interested in a sub until I have one in my home although I probably will never get one. Although between the Kharma sub and Rel subs, I would not know which would actually integrate better.
30X40' is a big room. How are your speakers currently positioned and your seating distance?

I think that if you're looking for higher SPLs, then the Midi might be a better option but if you're not looking for higher SPLs but rather a bit better bass extension and bass output, the 3.2s and sub combo (if it does indeed integrate well) might potentially be the most satisfying option. I've gone back and forth in terms of thinking whether a large speaker is better or having a well-integrated sub in the system. I still have not heard a big speaker produce the bass impact that I once heard a well-integrated Rel studio in a large room connected to an essentially full-range speaker.
Hey Owl, 18ft wide is pretty wide but did you say that you found having the speakers close to the side walls to be better sounding? If you found that you didn't really get much more in the way of bass from larger speakers in your rooms, then the sub may indeed be the answer, but then again, you have more than enough room for a bigger speaker to integrate. In my room, I actually have a bass boost at 30hz and not much below that, so I was thinking it might be nice to have a sub that just fills the lower octaves.
I would be very interested in your listening impressions so keep us updated.
IMO, the Kharma's can sound fabulous with a variety of less expensive electronics. Of course, if you want to extract EVERYTHING they are capable of you'll have to pay accordingly.

I share the same sentiments although we seem to be the minority. Most people think that SOTA associated gear is a must with speakers as revealing as the 3.2s, but when I first got the speakers, the speakers cost double the combined cost of my associated gear! It sounded pretty good to my ears. Of course hifi is all relative and subsequent upgrades have been upgrades. The Kharmas are speakers that makes you think that speakers are the most important. The 3.2s are suppose to be limited edition though.
Interesting insights Fmpnd, although I think you're one of the few I've heard from who actually prefered the M1.2 over the ML1.1s. Since you chose the M1.2s, I'm guessing you preferred it overall over the ML2.1s as well?
Rcupka, are you suggesting that the Tenors are more about marketing than performance and Lamm is not? Compare the number of ads, the size of the ads, and the placement of ads between the two companies and you tell me which one wins out? Also, if you haven't noticed, reviewers seem to be allowed to keep their Lamm equipment for review much longer than other products (marketing?)

Tenor's situation is unfortunate but you have to understand that they have virtually no domestic market. Ask Wyetech about their experience with finding local dealers and they'll tell you that the reason they sell direct is because they were tired of being shooed away. There are many Canadian manufacturers of cables among other things who had good products but went "belly up" after 911 and with the rising loonie, since most of their business is from the US market.

Besides the recent times, have you heard of any Tenor owner not being able to call up Tenor for advice and support? Pointing out current service problems is one thing, but suggesting that their products sold based on their marketing is a bit unfair and entirely untrue.