Yeah, I have an opinion... I wish I was you right now.
Pinkus, I know Tidalists. I'm also one of them because it is really outstanding brand. You need to try.
During Moscow HighEnd show the only room with good sound was Tidal's room. Small Amea speakers sounds better than all the rest of the whole show.
In general Gryphon is a bit too analytical, but not Colosseum!
It is great amp!
Tidal I think may be a bit too bright, but I prefer bright then dark.
This will be very interesting comparision.
I'll post review here!
You should consider adding Avalon and TAD to your speaker search. I would prefer those to Wilson, Rockport, and Magico. I'd like to hear the Tidal sometime, but $180k is heck-of-a-lot for a speaker that does bass.
Incidentally, I am skeptical that a company can make every component outstanding. I think good audio companies have a niche. Maybe Tidal and Gryphon are the exceptions, but one should keep an open mind when putting a system together.
Mike, I think at this level of transparency and neutrality speakers just shows how is the source and electronics.
Both times I heard Tidal, I heard it with Continuum Caliburn and I was so much impressed with this source that definately will have it in my system soon. Both times I heard Trident with Mikado. I had Mikado and replaced it as it is much lower class and not comparable with any vinyl setup.
Trident perfectly works in any room, big or small.
Sunray looks like prefers big rooms.
My room is relatevly small, arround 30-35sqm.
So, I'm not so sure that Sunray will win.
General resolution is much lower than Gryphon.
It is like sitting far away from the orchestra.
I prefer first row and Trident brings you even to the conductor place.
I know that many don't like 1st row, but I like.
And all my "fighting" with audiosystem is for resolution!
Highest possible resolution.
Tidal sound is magical.
It has perfect timbers.
Very comfortable and musical sound.
My solid state system sounds like tube system.
But I prefer "monitor" type of sound, not "musical" type.
So, it is the matter of taste!
I would disagree that seating perspective is synonymous with detail. For me, close sound is not real sound. Sure, you see the trees, but you lose the forest. Music and detail are possible: you can have the forest and the trees. The whole is preserved, but you can also drill-down and appreciate the components.
Think of Solti conducting, always trying to maximize the excitement at a given moment. But he loses sense of the big picture and the music sounds episodic. Think of Furtwangler conducting. He sees the composition as a whole, and manages to balance excitement and darkness with overarching themes that reveal the genius of his approach and the composer. With Solti, maybe I can listen to a little bit, and his recordings are inconsequential. With Furtwangler, it only really makes sense if you listen start to finish. Again, forest and trees.
I'll let the conductor work and worry about all the little details. I'll sit back and enjoy the complex and layered harmonies, rhythms, and colors which emerge. Nothing is spotlit, everything is preserved. This is the sound I have been sculpting for the past 2 years.
Yes, I understand. Everyone is for the trees and the forest, I believe.
Here you choose more trees, or more forest.
I prefer more trees. 1-3 row on live concert is my reference.
And to this reference Trident is closer, that's all.
It has some timber inaccuracy in high frequencies, so I'll continue my search. Hope to get Kaiser Kawero.
No, no, no.
Not forest or trees. I'm talking forest AND trees. Like a real performance. I prefer the floor of the hall for an orchestral performance, which is more detailed and involving compared to the balcony. But the detail is a means to an end, and not an end in itself.
Recordings have a certain perspective in terms of space and position. They are all different. Altering that perspective is a coloration that accentuates certain frequencies to make some aspects seem more prominent. But when you accurately reproduce a recording, the detail is there but it resides more in the subconscious. The goal is to reproduce the recording in a natural way and not to alter the presentation. If you make it into something it is not, something else has to compromised.
When paying for premium audio components without compromise, expect . . . no compromise.
I have had a chance to hear the Kaiser Kawero. I have not yet heard the Tidal speakers but I have to say that the Kaiser speakers would be very hard to top. By far the best speaker I have heard. I had limited my budget to significantly less than the Kaiser speakers cost but after hearing them it is very hard to listen to other speakers knowing what I am missing.
Luthcol, thank you for comment. We have one in Moscow and I'm going to get it for audition at home.
Rtn1, I understand your position. I also mean forest AND trees.
And I'm sure that everyone is looking for the same: as close to real as possible.
What I mean is that listening from 1st row and from 10th is very big difference. Most of recording made from microphones which are placed near the instruments, so the real accurate reproduction must bring you very close to orchestra. And if not, than this is coloration.
It is my opinion, but who knows the truth?
it is interesting that you think the Kawero is not fullrange, that means it lacks base.
I think you have never heard the Kawero nor are you familiar with the design rationale behind. Why do you come to that conclusion?.
Concerning rear firing woofers in the base. Please consider that at the low frequencies even front radiating speaker like your Avalon are omnidirectional. So there is not to much difference is it? There are other reasons why the Kawero has the rear firing units.
Please check also this review:
The Kawero is also available with 3 different woofer sensitivities depending on the clients room acoustic parameters like reverberation time and bass ratio.
I listened to the Kawero (and had the pleasure of meeting and talking with Mr. Weber) at RMAF in 2008. The Kawero was in a large room, and I can assure you it is a full range speaker with more than enough bass to energize even a large space. It was, for me, one of the best musical experiences I heard in 2008.
I could have listened to their system all day.
Mr. Weber was one of the nicest and most interesting people I met that year.
Having heard the Tidal Contriva Dicera SEs last year at both the RMAF and CES, I bought them and now have them settled in. I still find them the best speakers I have heard.
I heard the Kaweros last year and had no interest in them and I also heard the Tidal Sunrays at CES and had no interest in them either.
This year I will spend some time listening to the Lansche speakers brought into the US by Aaudio imports. I am told by others that they are superior to the Contrivas, but I have to hear for myself. I have always loved plasma tweeters, but beginning with the Ionovacs have never found them to mate with other drivers. I must say that several CESs ago I heard what I recall being the Lansche Model 8s at CES. Everything in the system was foreign to me, but I was very impressed.
This year's RMAF promises to be very interesting to me. I doubt very seriously that I would consider replacing the Tidal Contrivas, however.
i can assure you that my sunrays reach the lowest of octaves when pushed, and/or when it is on the material played. mind you, my room is quite large(~525sqft), and i certailny feel the visceral impact of bass, acoustic or electrical, kick drum and organs.
as for the kk speakers-- looks can be deceiving -- heard them at ces a couple of years ago, and they were stunning!
Hi Murat, I believe with this discussion we very much enter a realm of taste. Personally, I join the chorus and say I'm perfectly satisfied with the bass my Contivas deliver. It is clean, fast, goes very deep and is downright visceral where the music is intended to be. In my perception the Contriva's bass is simply "correct". Mind you, I consider myself a bass buff and like to hear a system thunder now and then, but I tend to get tired from what I would perceive as overblown.
I would see an analogy in wine with some big and extremely extracted Priorats. I was head over heels for a short period of time, a wonderful experience to have made. But not a wine to stack the cellar with, as it will never show the finesse nor the "queue du paon" of subtle aromas that I'm looking for personally. Still, some of them are truly great wines, my predilection is not going to change that.
So, I cross my fingers that you'll find a speaker able to move your sofa ;^) and that otherwise has the virtues of a Contriva.
I'm looking for the speakers unlimited in all frequency range.
I understand that without lowest bass system can be great anyway.
Amea is one of the best speakers on earth, I believe.
I heard once japaniese drums 2m size in one system.
That was incredible impression!
Floor, walls, everything shakes without any bloom!
This is what I'm looking for!
I have owned a Zu Method subwoofer since June, but I just got around to installing it, in part because of my being gone for three months. I must say that as Murat might suggest, it does improve the sound. The Method does have an invert phase button and I have used it to adjust the volume with 40 Hz and lower signals.
I am hearing body added at the bottom, but also improved sound staging. The Method is very fast and was discontinued as Zu was losing money on it, or so I am told. My unit has been off for some time, so I expect it will improve today.
Tbg, just wondering.. isn't it a bit of a waste in buying your supposedly full-range Contriva only to pair it with a sub now. In so doing, wouldn't you be better off with just the Amea or Piano +Subs, then spend the excess to fund for upgrade elsewhere? In my few encounters with them at dealer (normal Contriva), unless your room is really large, given right amplifications, they do not need to be augmented by one. Anyway would be interested to know the outcome of your trial, and hope you could get it to cohere seamlessly. Goodluck.
Bvdiman, I heard that Tidal was coming out with a sub for the Contrivas. I bought the Zu at a good price. As you know, I was not having any real problems with bass and the Contrivas. Heaven knows the Sanders Audio amp's 900 watts per side is enough, but I did like the Zu on Hugh Masekela's Stimela drums last night.
Tbg, interesting experiment. I also tried to pair Sunray with JL Audio Fathom 13". But can't find right configuration for sub. It always sounds separated. I think it is not easy to do.
But at the end, my Gryphon Atlantis has greater bass than Trident or Sunray.
Actually, I'm thinking to stop my search.
I did acoustic cables from 2 Argento SMREE power cords and now like very much what I have. Also interesting and unexpected finding:)