Khrys, please keep informed as to your experiences with, and opinions about, the YG Kipods. Thanks in advance.
19 responses Add your response
Dgad, the Kipod Studio with active subwoofer retails for $38k. They are easy to drive and do not require hyper-expensive amps.
Though they are made in Colorado they are indeed very well received in Asia. They are amazingly easy to position, even by one person. Since they're not ported they'll probably end up closer to the back wall than my W/P8s.
I'll let you know if it was worth the effort.
i have also heard the Kipods in the same system as a pair of WP8's. the Kipods imaged like champs. in the early setup phase before we were able to connect the lower bass module, we played an acoustic guitar track that was as transparent and true-to-like as any other sound i have EVER heard a speaker reproduce. we did feel that the Kipod was not able to play as loud as the WP8, but the YG was more neutral and measured much better than the 8's.
Well, it was worth the effort. The Kipods are dialed in and are now the speakers in residence, having displaced my venerable W/P8s.
The Kipods are more linear, image better and are more articulate. There is a clarity of voice and presence that rivals stats. Add the powerfully lithe bass and you have a dynamic cohesiveness that is closest to the "holy grail" of transducers as I've heard.
They are easy to drive but they do like power.
The 500 watts of SS power I have on tap makes them sing, but I intend to try 450 watts of VTL magic just in case.
Make no mistake, despite their precision these speakers are toe-tappers.
Tboooe, the Kipods are in the same family of sound as Wilsons with respect to refinement and quality but the differences are readily apparent. As with any components of this caliber, "better" simply means "preference".
The Wilsons are somewhat more dynamic, have a bigger, fuller sound and certainly sounded better on some recordings. But I found the more linearly extended frequency range and imaging of the Kipods to be preferable at the end of the day.
With my equipment and listening environment the Kipods' soundstage unfolds behind the speakers with great clarity, depth and cohesion. They get out of the way and simply do not appear to be the source of the sound. The Wilsons project the soundstage in front of the speakers very convincingly but seem to get in the way of their own sonic illusion.
Because the Kipods are easy to move by myself, they are ultimately more easy to place. But it takes some work if you want to get it right. I have never found speaker placement obsession to be more enjoyable however because I need not rely on others and can place them by ear rather than formulated compromise. Not an insignificant advantage.
I do not regret purchasing them.
I got my Wilson W/P8s 2 weeks ago...also heard the Kipods (hedgehog) Studio with it's subwoofer for a few hours, in a friend's house.
My impressions are (I heard tham in a different room/geer/time), that the Kipods are more accurate, transparent and have more details than the W/P8s. The soundstage in the Kipods is lower and more laid back, Still more 3D and they are more disappearring. The bass in the Kipods is fast and quick, but lack some punch, slam and attack in the mid-bass region (50- 70 Hz). The Kipods fit to smaller rooms than the W/P8s. They are less efficiency and need SS amp with rated power of 200Wp/c.
The W/P8s are warmer and sound to me a little more musical with ARC REF3+ ARC REF110, than the Kipods with Krells electronics (SACD Standard+ KAV 400xi). They have ability to play in a very loud SPL without any felling of strain. The bass has more bottom-end, dynamic impact and deeper extension. The W/P8s are speakers for all kinds of music. the Kipod sounds best with small groups or jazz music, but less good with electrified rock or big classical orchestra.
I think both speakers are excellent.
BTW, the Kipod now in mk II, the price has gone up $4000 to $42,000 USD per pair.
I was interested in the Kipods, but have yet to hear them. I did, however, have an opportunity to demo the YG Anat Studio Reference II in my home, and bought the pair. Needless to say, I was captivated by their ability to reproduce musical events. One problem is occasioned by their weight, which comes to 280 lbs per side. One cannot by one's self move them around to find the best placement. They are superb where presently placed, at least from my listening position, so I am not all that motivated to try other possibilities. I am running them with a VAC Phi Beta integrated, 110 watts per chanel, and can get all the clean volume that I desire. I've done a bit of tube rolling, with satisfying results. Based on achieved design philosophy, however, I suspect that the Anats might do best with electronics that are also designed and constructed to produce the lowest distortion possible -- which, insofar as I know, would be Halcros. But, of course, that is merely a speculation on my part.
I agree with most of what Tomer tsin says about the comparison between Wilson W/P8s and YG Kipods (revered Israeli children's character BTW) but take issue with two of his points:
Having lived with the W/P8s for over a year and the Kipods for over one month and both for 3 weeks I can say definitively that the Kipods have deeper bass extension. Same equipment, same room, same conditions, the Stereophile Test CD 2 warble tones go audibly deeper with the Kipods. 3/4th Octave or better.
The Wilson's midbass punch and slam which I hear in the 60 - 80 Hz range can easily be replicated by the Kipod's 4 adjustable subwoofer controls: high-pass, low-pass. boost, and gain. If you must.
I resist typifying a speaker's musical genre. A speaker for "all types of music" is likely homogenizing the sound.
Cream on top, hopefully.
Just to set the record straight there is no MKII version of the Kipod. There is a version II of the Anat called the Anat Reference II. The Kipod does benefit from some of the technology in the Anat Ref II. If you are considering a speaker in the under $40K price range you should give the Kipod serious cosideration and a listen.
I am the YG Acoustics Dealer in Texas.
I am considering the YG acoustics line (either Reference Studio or Kipod) for my new listening room. Thanks to all who have posted here-- very helpful. Was curious with the active speakers needing direct interconnect, how do most of you have setup? Do you run 2 interconnects per channel from your preamp (i.e., one for the amp to drive the passive portion of the YGs, and one directly to the subwoofer portion of the YGs)? Or, do you split the interconnect signal from the preamp? My pre has both XLR and RCA outs which I could use both to cable the YGs.
Just curious as I haven't had experience with (partially) active speakers.
Vjayh, I have Anat Studio Reference II speakers. I run one interconnect per channel from each speaker to the Pre-out of my integrated VAC amplifier. It happens that I am using RCA terminations, but the subwoofer modules of the Anats will accept either RCAs or XLRs. There is a small external switch that should be set to either RCA or XLR. Various cable manufacturers offer subwoofer cables, but I haven't had time to experiment with them as yet. In any case, with the Anats you need two cables, one for the right channel, the other for the left. It is a painless and, insofar as I can see, a foolproof operation.
Vjayh, It occurs to me that I may not have worded my reply to you as clearly as I might. When I talk about "one interconnect per channel from each speaker," I am talking about the subwoofer drivers. You need one interconnect cable for each subwoofer. The upper modules, which contain the tweeters and mid-woofers, are connected in the usual way -- that is, a pair of speaker cables from each upper module to the amp. So each channel of the tweeter-mid-woofers reuires a pair of speaker cables, and each subwoofer channel (each lower module) requires one interconnect cable, to connect your preamp to the dedicated subwoofer amp that is in the lower module. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough in my first posting.