YG Acoustics add in Stereophile

I saw the YG Acoustics add in Stereophile and was wondering if anyone knew what "Competitor" speaker they were refering to in the measurements. I heard the YGs at CES and they sounded great to me.
The NRC of Canada said that the YG Acoustic speaker that they measured was the flattest speaker they have ever tested.

I have heard them at CES as well as one time in a room that I am quite familiar with, each time they were very impressive.
I have heard it was the Wilson Alexandria X2. Anyone know for sure?
I also heard that it was the Alexandria X2. I believe the mbl 101E was also involved. Do not know for sure.

However they measure, they are great speakers.
I ended up trading my W/P8s for the YG Kipods.
What have YG owners been impressed with that has led them to purchase these speakers? I have heard good things as well.

PS I assumed this thread would be about their ads calling themselves the best speaker ever/period or whatever they say.
I am personally in that section of the buying community that would never purchase from this company on principle based solely on the silliness of their chosen slogan.

Oh, and they only sound great, not incredible.

Do you still live in Dallas? Drop me an email. I would love to bring the Kipods over to your house for a demo.
Bflowers I was taken with the Kipod's combination of extended but linear frequency response and holographically precise imaging. Email me and I'd be happy to discuss it further.

Paulfolbrecht, I appreciate your purchasing principles.
So why even bother to listen?

What if you actually liked them?
That's what happened to me BTW.

Now YG claims Best on Earth. Wonder how YG listened and compared YG loudspeakers to all loudspeakers on Earth. Bold claim this I always take with a bag of salt. I do know a company whos loudspeakers are the best in the universe a big step up from Best on Earth email if you want to know. YG does use about $1800 worth of SEAs drivers at full price retail bet they get a price break. Whats the retail on this Best loudspeaker on Earth and why is it so much better than other SEAs equiped loudspeakers? I see many with very simlar design. Bet the hi-cost has something to do with much advertising.
You tell me if this is the 'Best on Earth': I went into the YG room at RMAF with a copy of Peter Gabriel's 'The Long Wlak Home', which is a soundtrack recording for 'The Rabbit Proof Fence'.

Track 1, moderate volume, 20 seconds in: the *midrange* driver bottomed out on a *bass* note, and snapped loudly. This is something I can't get my speakers at home to do, even if I play that track unreasonably loud. IME my speakers at home (Classic Audio Reproductions T-3) come off better than the 'Best on Earth'...
You know what's funny? Their advertisement got them recognition in this forum. Bad press is still press.

Atmashpere, RMAF is hardly the place to truly evalutate speakers.

JohnK, the drivers are not the only thing that goes into a speaker. What if they use Audio Note capacitors at over $1K a piece? Their enclosures are hardly "run of the mill" enclosures. ie mdf with veneer.

I have not heard these speakers....maybe they suck.
You have to be very confidant and bold with your design to make such a claim.
It is extremely difficult to prove it , if not impossible.
I am personally against claims of that sort but to my ear they sound great..............I would not say - THE BEST but close.
10 best .............? YES........but that is my opinion only.
Expensive.........absolutly . Are they worth it??
It depends on the your credit and savings account.
s7horton I design loudspeakers well aware of what goes into designing testing manufactering loudspeakers. And I see no AN caps in crossover pictures of YG. I could of missed them but still a $1000 cap is greatly over priced no mater how good it sounds my opinion. I have no comments to make about YG sound quality only the Claim best on earth and cost of said loudspeaker related to parts costs etc. And I have heard used these drivers and better SEAs in many loudspeakers when I see YG I think Madisound thor sitting on a sub.
FWIW I agree that to evaluate *the sound* of a speaker at a show is hit or miss at best. But to document a situation wherein a driver bottoms out once a certain combination of frequency and amplitude are met- that is a different matter. The room they had was not that large- we were not playing that loud a volume (leastwise not in my book anyway), yet the midrange driver buzzed loudly as it bottomed out repeatedly during the duration of the bass note.

I think the design path was: no crossover capacitor in series with the midrange, instead limit its excursion via an airtight box on the backside of the driver. The advantage of this approach is that crossover cap isn't there to mess up the sound of the mids and highs.

The downside is threefold: the midrange is electrically in parallel with the woofer, making this an inappropriate load for a tube amp (8 ohms in the mids and highs, 4 ohms in the bass; no tube amp will play the bass right on it as a result), no crossover on the midrange means that with enough bass excursion the driver can bottom out (which could damage the driver), and finally doppler-effect distortion from the midrange driver due to excessive excursion.

I don't recall the amp being used (it was transistor) but the speaker sounded good when otherwise within its limits.
John, regardless of whether or not you feel a $1000 cap is overpriced has nothing to do with the actual cost of the parts. I was only pointing out that they may well have the same amount of money into crossovers as they do drivers. In addition they *could* have substatial time into rebuilding stock drivers to their specifications. (This is all speculation, I do not know if they use off the shelf drivers or not) If you design and manufacture loudspeakers, you know as well as anyone that which drivers are used only play a small role in how the system actually sounds. Crossover implementation, cabinet construction, and damping *can* play a larger role than drivers, depending on the system.

I'm not convinced that sound quality is related to retail price. Someone could use lesser drivers than Seas and still make the claim that their system is the best on earth. It is nothing more than a claim, and it is subjective. Because of that, there is no such thing as the "best" speaker. Even if you had a speaker that perfectly reproduced recordings, some may not care for the sound of it.

Atmasphere, you like I, are speculating about the crossover design, and correct me if I'm wrong, you don't actually know if there is a capacitor in the midrange circuit or not.
S7horton, you are quite right, but having done this a few years, there are certain things that show up from time to time that you get to recognize. If there *was* a capacitor in the midrange circuit, it was very large and very transparent. Those two qualities, as many speaker designers know, do not go hand in hand. But there could have been one- if so it would have been an expensive part!

Occam's Razor suggests that it was not there at all.
Atmosphere,you had intrigued me(a few days ago) by mentioning Classic Audio Reproductions.First oof,the prices seem quite reasonable for the cabinetry alone.

Can you possibly mention how these speakers come off,in sound,to you?Are they full range?

I've heard similar "looking" speakers(of course this has no meaning) at the Lamm exhibit(HE 2006),where they were very rolled in freq extremes.

We have a good enough audio vocabulary these days to understand your thoughts,should you be so inclined to state them.

THanks,as always
Atmasphere, as an owner of these speakers I think your analysis of the design path of the crossover is probably correct.

And I have heard the midrange driver bottom out as you did. But it only occurred once when my former Wilson dealer was testing the system at his request. I have never caused it playing any of my music at all levels at any time.

I agree that the single advantage of this design is clearer mids and highs.
Much clearer IMHO.
So much clearer that resolution is largely independent of volume.

But the speakers do not function well with tube amps.
Even your superb designs, I suspect.
I own a pair of YG Anat Reference II Studios, and I have never experienced the "bottoming out" mentioned by Atmasphere and Khrys. The Anats have two mid-woofers per side, whereas the Kipods have one per side. YG literature maintains that the Kipods should be selected for rooms of a certain size and the Anat Studios for larger rooms (and the Anat Professionals, with two subwoofers per side, for still larger rooms). Unusually enough, YG maintains that, allowing for differences in capacity to energize different size rooms, all of their speakers will sound much the same. That is, unlike most other speaker manufacturers, where the sound quality of their speaker lines is claimed to increase with the relative costs of different models, YG claims that the sound quality of Kipods and Anats is very similar, and that the major difference relative to costs is that the more expensive models play louder than the cheaper ones. If this is indeed the case (I myself have never heard the Kipods), then it may be that the Kipods can more easily be driven to some form of distortion than ther Anats if played very loudly. The different YG models, ideally speaking, are selected for their appropriateness in different size rooms. The benefit of adhering to this principle is superb sound in medium or small size rooms at the relatively modest cost of the Kipods (compared to more expensive Anat models). The reciprocal potential cost would be a greater likelihood of overdriving the Kipods as compared to the Anats. In loudspeakers as in life in general, there is usually a trade-off of benefits versus costs.
The advertising claims that disturb some Audiogon members are, I agree, extravagant. It is unlikley to the point of impossibility that the authors of those claims have heard all of the speakers in the world. But YG does maintain a serious and consisten program of testing the loudspeakers of other manufacturers. And, so far, none of the speakers examined test as well as the YG speakers. The YGs are not only remarkably flat, but the drivers in the main modules work together, with very little phase difference. This enables the YGs to achieve the sonic benefits of single driver loudspeaker systems without emulating some of the drawbacks of single driver loudspeaker systems. The results are a clarity and coherence that are a delight to experience.
A real problem in getting the best one can out of the Anats, I have found, has to do with partnering suitable electronics and cables. I started out with a really fine integrated tube amplifier, a unit that I had purchased originally for Sonus Faber Amati loudpeakers. In the years that I had owned the Amatis, I tried quite a number of amplifiers and preamplifiers, and the tube integrated was the best I heard in partnership with the Sonus Faber speakers. It sounded fairly good when I connected it to the Anats (my wife especially remembers it with fondness in handling some of her favorite vocalists). But there were some problems. I have recently shifted to all solid state electronics and new speaker cables, and the sound has very markedly improved. In addition to usual worries about impedance matching and the like, YGs really should be coupled with "neutral" components. I understand "neutral" to mean a minimalization of either adding or subtracting information to or from the signal received. The YGs are carefully designed to be as neutral as possible, and in my opinion one would be subverting their design by coupling them with tone controls. Better, in my opinion, to buy one's personal tastes in euphonia by buying cheaper speakers than to start off with something neutral and then, in a manner of speaking, unneutralize it.
I also own a pair of YG ANAT Ref II professional speakers and I agree with Kusina. Additionally, I have a pair of Kipod studios as rear channels and an ANAT Ref II center channel.

My listening position is 16ft back from the ANATs in an L-shaped room that is 16x32ft on the vertical part of the L and 35x16ft on the horizontal. I listen at realistic levels (well over 100db at the listening position) and have never had an issue with the speakers "bottoming" out or showing any stress whatsoever.

In my experience, typically, when a speaker shows signs of stress like that it is the amplifier not being able to maintain control and not an issue with the speaker. I certainly don't know in the cases that were cited.

I've heard many speakers, and while I've not heard every speaker, the YG are the best I've heard (and yes all speakers that I've heard have been on the Earth :) )! They sound realistic at any volume. I would highly encourage an audition of them.
Kusina and Kevinm, it is most definitely possible to overdrive the midrange unit of the Kipods but it is highly improbable that it would ever occur in any listening session unless you were trying.

YG knows this and offers an optional outboard high pass filter but I can't imagine ever needing one.

The Kipods are perfect for my tastes in music in my listening room.

They are certainly the best I've heard.

On this planet, anyway.
There is much more to loudspeakers performance then flat FR. Many cheap 2-ways have as good or better (off-axis) FR then YG. Have a look at a $1500 Paradigm (And they actually also go below 80Hz). But YG does not seems to know that or, quite successfully I suppose, rely on the gullibility of its propaganda readers. Just few point for thoughts: Look at Soundstage Anat Reference measurements. Does the 30 degree off-axis resemble the measurements in their ad? Not even close. How about, MAJOR distortion levels in the 300-500 Hz and 2K-6K region (Some of the highest I ever seen). These high THD figures tell much more about the speaker then its FR alone. How about his ridicules claim that he is one of the only “foreigner” to ever win Japanese Stereo Sound Grand Prix (Basically 90% of the manufactures to win are, not Japanese – that will make them foreigners right?). Now YG speakers might be fine (Although the idea of adding a powered sub to a full-range monitor is marginal at best), but I can’t see how anyone can take any of their claims seriously.
I came to hear the YGs two years ago at CES. Previously I have heard what I regard as the best speaker ever at the RMAF-the LSA model 10 as resurrected by John Tucker from a never assembled DK Designs speaker. By CES they had decided that the aluminum cabinet was too expensive to make and to not market the speaker.

I saw in the YG's the same rigid cabinets and took a listen. Their room was just awful but nevertheless the Anats sounded quite good. The References, however, were clearly better. Nevertheless, I really could not listen through the room's acoustics. Had they not been so expensive and had I been able to sell my present speakers, I would have tried them although I probably would have limited myself to the Anats despite having a large room. I continue to think they have great potential and now have the advantage of being American made and without the inflated prices of European speakers caused by the quite weak US dollar.
Tbg, I do agree with you. I love the Kipods but the Anat Reference II Studios are exceptional. Their American manufacture makes them a relative bargain but it was their performance that sold me.

As you may surmise, they sound far better in a "home" environment than at CES.
They do not require much room treatment at all to sound their best, unlike many other superb speakers I have had in my home.

So I bought them. Could not be more pleased.

Especially since the dollars went to Colorado, a place and people I admire and am pleased to support.

Not that I have any less appreciation for the advantages of the opportunistic global outsourcing transforming our "hobby".

I doubt seriously that my opinion of this transformation could possibly ever sink lower.

But I am aware that many toil diligently toward that end, unwittingly.
And even more unconsciously.

Even in our little hobby there are now sociodemoeconomic factors to consider, unless of course you just have to have that beryllium tweeter at sweatshop prices.

Our daughters here will soon be handproducing them anyway and since they won't have healthcare no responsible society will be able to compete.

I am not looking forward to that soundstage.

Is it true that a) YG takes longer to break in and b) though they seem to avoid publishing data, they are quite insensitive and need a lot of power? ..as in 200W in 8 ohms solid state wld be the bare minimum?
Henryhk, yes I do believe that YG speakers require a somewhat longer break in period that the average high end contender but it is not outrageous. They sound perfectly agreeable right "out of the box" but bloom progressively at least through 120 hours. I stopped timing after that because they sounded so good at that point that I just didn't care and got completely lost in the music.

I do believe that YGs like lots of clean SS power. I use a McCormack DNA 500 rated @ 500W into 8 ohms, doubling to 1kW into 4 ohms. I have always contended that this amp is a "giant-killer" priced @ $7k even before I owned the YGs.

Dick Diamond, YG's Director of Sales & Marketing, kindly visited my home to assist with the placement and voicing of my new Anat Reference II Studios and I do not think I am exaggerating his enthusiasm for the DNA 500's performance by recounting his intention to mention this amp to Yoav Geva himself as a contender.

Well, I've heard the Anat stand-mounts and the same model with the bass module (the model name escapes me now) at my dealer's, with top class electronics, and I sincerely don't understand what the fuss is about. Right, they sound good, no doubts about it. But so does a lot of other stuff at much lower prices as well.

World's best? Not even close in my book. :) But if others think so, I'm happy for them - no offense intended!

As always with high-end gear, an audition is a must.
Osgorth, no offense taken here.

Hey, at least you listened; which I suspect is the goal of the whole "World's Best" thing anyway. Got me, a long time Wilson aficionado to compare them in my home just to confirm the hubris.

To my surprise, they actually were the best I'd ever heard.
So I bought them. Kipods first, now Anat Ref II Studios.

But the ever-shrinking world still has room for plenty of "bests".
May each find their own.
Thanks Khrys. I had auditioned briefly the Anat Ref modules on stands awhile ago, but it was a) the first day the dealer received a pair and b) I asked them to use a power amp of similiar power capability of mine (they used a 150W amp in 8 ohms which I was not familiar with). I found the imaging the best I have ever heard, unreal really, but no bloom, sort of steely. But I always thought I probaby check them out again once they are broken in, and next time to try various degrees of power...given at the end of the day if I end up loving them I can always think about power amps later.
YG owners,
What amps are you using with your YGs? And what model YG speaker do you have?
I'm using Halcro DM88's for the left and right channel (ANAT ref II Professionals), I use two Linn Klimax solo's for the center channel (ANAT ref II main module). And a Linn Klout for each of the rear channels (Kipod Studios).

I've tried the Solos on the left and right and they worked well, certainly not of the level of the DM88s.

When I set up the Kipods as the rear channels, I actually wired them as the left right and listened to music. I find this a good way to determine the "best" placement. The combination of klouts (which is of course older amps) and kipods was very musical. I do have two klimax chakra twins that I was going to use on the Kipods, but have not felt the need.

The speakers are very musical, resolving, and transparent. I'm amazed at how they respond to everything that you do, setup, placement, etc.

Wow Kevin! what a great setup. Please post pictures if you can.
I moved my system from "private" to the forum. You can see it by clicking on the systems link.
I have a pair of Anat Ref II Studios. I am now running them with a Burmester 911 Mk 3 amplifier, connected in balanced mode by a Burmester silver XLR cable to an MBL 5011. The sound is quite good, but being a hobbyist I'm always looking for improvement. In the fall, I hope to try out other premaps. Three likely candidates are: (1) the Burmester 011, whch should partner well with my amp; (2) the MBL 6010D, which I imagine to be an improvement over the already good 5011; and a Halcro pre, which, based on previous experience, I regard as virtually a laboratory instrument. My musical tastes are largely classical, and I listen to CDs, SACDs, and FM radio, so a line stage is all I really need (the Burmester has phono inputs).
I just listened to Anat Reference II Studio speakers at my close friend's home. He is the only dealer in California and he has sold 4 pairs of these this month and he has a pair for himself at his home. He is also part owner of Qsonix.

My friend have had many high end speakers go through his home in his fantastic rather large listening room over the years. I have listened to Dynaudio Evidence Temptation and MBL 111E in this room through his favorite Wolcott tube amplifiers and Tara Labs speaker cables. These Wolcott tube amplifers are amazing as they even drove the notoriously difficult and inefficient MBL 111E speakers without any problem.

I must say Anat Reference II Studio speakers sounded phenomenal at all listening level with convincing detail, dynamics and realism I've never heard from Dynaudio Evidence Temptation nor MBL 111E speakers. It was very spooky indeed giving an illusion that there is a live performance there in front of you regardless of the source of music material. Symphonics sounded like symphonics at concert hall while jazz material sounded like people jamming in front of you.

I would say that it has similar neutral sound as Dynaudio Evidence Temptation but with more musical truth having layers of veil removed from it. I don't like MBL 111E sound at all as its lacking dynamics and transients to its sound.

Having said this I did hear the Anat bottom out when my friend had volume level very unrealisticly loud on one of the very dynamic music passages. I went close to see the midrange while music is playing and you can see that it is working hard at loud levels with its driver excursions quite active. I felt the very solid aluminum chassis on its side at this volume level and you can feel it vibrating some what but no where near the level of vibration you would feel from other speakers having wood cabinets at that sound level. This is true for the seperate bass module below it as it was hardly vibrating as well.

So, under most realistic listening levels, I would suspect that Anats won't bottom out at all. But if you crank its volume level to loud party levels, bottoming out can conceivably happen as mentioned in this thread as I have heard it today. Having said this, I would be very happy to have these speakers if I could afford to own these speakers as I would never play music as loud as my friend played it today.
Stereo_phile, your finding are very interesting indeed. It would concern me if the sides of these speakers were vibrating as you have mentioned along with the midrange driver working so hard.

Regarding the vibration, these cabinets are aluminum so that would add a unwanted sonic signature which I would not think is pleasant. Regarding box speakers this has always been one off the negatives, the box interacting. There are box speakers out there that I have experienced that do not have this issue, Egglestons, Artemis and I have heard that the Rockport Altairs to name a few.

Interesting that your friend "slash dealer" has a very large listening room and that you kept making reference to him having many high end speakers along with mentioning he had MBL 111's and that the dynamics did not match up to the Anat Reference II Studio speakers.

Your friend should be using the MBL 101E's and not 111's, the 101E's would be better up for this task especially if it is a large room and secondly choice of amplification would have an effect and your issues regarding dynamics and transients would be non existent. The Anat Reference II Studio speakers do have a powered sub correct so you are only driving the top.

If comparison are to be done they should be done comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges.

I personally have not heard Anat Reference II Studio speakers but a few who have have told me they are nothing special but others have said the yare worth a listen so I look forward to hearing them but if the cabinets which are aluminum are vibrating would concern me as it would add unwanted sonics.

The Dynaudio Evidence Temptation, I have heard these many times and would have to disagree with your findings but they are your opinions, I also read that you got rid of yours and read why. I believe there were other issues going on and the speakers were not to be the blame. I heard the Temptation's sound best when paired up with McIntosh 2KW amps and 1000P pre-amp in a rather large room where they can breath. 6-8 feet space behind the speakers to the wall, 5-6 feet space from the outside of the speaker to the wall and aprox. 8-9 feet between them and not like they were positioned in your room as per your pics. I would suspect the speakers you chose might be a better fit per size wise which are very nice speakers also but at the same time if the set-up is the same as per your pics it would be far from ideal and in my opinion you are not really getting to hear the full potential of the speakers. The Anat Reference II Studio speakers may work even better due to their design.

Kusina on 11-17-08: your post said I have a Burmester 911 Mk 3 amp. While the Burmester 011 pre is perfect for it, I chose not to use that pre because it lacks a balance control. After trying an MBL 5011, I ended up with a Krell Evo 202, which has a 50 ohm output impedance (the Burmester amp likes a pre with a low output impedance). After some experimentation with interconnects, I purchased a Kimber Select 1136

Your reply above seems to differ from this can you clarify.

i own the rockport altair's and i can tell you without hesitation or any doubt at all that there are no box vibrations. nor do they bottom out. in fact i am still looking for the bottom. i had considered the yg pro but could not get past the look, at $100000 + list price they should be better looking, not just metal pyramids. i also considered the upgraded alexandra 11's and focal grande(although i have not seen these in their new form). i chose the altair for the whole package sound, quality of built, looks(wife factor) warranty(5yr) and price. they are fantastic speaker as they should be.
Everyone...please don't read specs..listen with your ears - preferably in your own environment. It makes no difference at all if a speaker manufacturer says it's the flattest speaker..even if the boast is true...over what range?...at what sound pressure level...what about resonances??...how integrated are the various drivers themselves?...is it time aligned?...how fast do the drivers respond...do the speakers react to subtle dynamic swings,etc., etc.
To clarify, as requested: The earlier post (06/24/08) described my plans at the time to experiment with preamplifiers. The later post (11/17/08) describes what happened after a widened effort at experimentation. I found that the Krell EVO 202, plus a Kimber Select 1136 interconnect, sounded best to me when connected to my Burmester 911 Mk 3 amplifier. That is, that combination sounded better to my ears than my MBL 5010 preamp with a variety of other interconnects (Cardas Golden Reference, Siltech, and several other Kimber Select cables). I believe that the Burmester 911 Mk 3 performs best when coupled to a preamplifier with a low output impedance and an interconnect with relatively low impedance. Among other things, the right combination produces music with more shean or sparkle on top. As to the YG Anat Ref II Studios: mine have never bottomed out, nor have I experiences any cabinet vibraion. I have never played them at extremely high volume levels, but I do play them fairly loud, especially on full orchestra CDs. The front baffles are made of an alloy which is remarkably inert, and the rest of the cabinets are of aircraft grade aluminum. If you want to play music at 100 db or more in very large rooms, the YG Anat Ref II Professionals would probably be a better choice that the Studios, since the Professionals have two powered subwoofers per side whereas thew Studios have only one per side. But I am happy with what I have. With my present electronics and cabling, they come closer to live music than any other system that I have heard.

"rockport altair's and i can tell you without hesitation or any doubt at all that there are no box vibrations."

Of course they do not vibrate. They have a big hole in the back… You did not find the bottom since, being a ported design, you do not have much of it. Having said that, it does sound like the YG do not have a high-pass filter on the mids. Not very smart and quite a bit of money for what is basically a 2 way with a sub.
Koegz on 10-31-08 you posted a thread "rockport altair any informed opinions?"

and now you have just posted saying you own a pair wow! that was quick.

Did you buy a used pair or new, could you possibly go back to that thread and give more detailed information regarding your set-up and your thoughts.

Roypan, I have been wondering the same about the design so which is it, full range and two way with a sub.
royan i see you have the magico's V3, your telling me i have no lower end? i love guys like you who think they know all. i considered the M6's(a fantastic speaker) but the V3's did not meet the standard, in the end i went with the rockport altair. as for the bottom end, i do not use nor do i need a sub. the lower end is extremely tight and extremely deep. i suppose no ported speakers have any lower end. certainly not the alexandria's or the focal grande's also speakers considered. i know you need a sub with those V3's my 800d's had a better lower end. oh but wait your magico's arn't ported why would you need a sub? i am not knocking the V3's they are a great speaker for their range, but please don't tell me about bass, i'll put my set up against yours any day and just wipe the floor with you. "having said that, it sounds to me" that you are just jealius and you should be!
Physics are physics. A ported design like the Alter, will be apprx 24 db down from its reference efficiency point at 20Hz. Like it or not, that is how it goes. Whatever low bass you are hearing, is in your head not in the real world. In terms of the V3, you can ck online and see how low they actually go. They have 12db more output at 20Hz then the 4 time more expensive Alter. It is not all about size and gloss finish you know. But again, if you live in your head, that doesn’t really matter doesn’t it? I have nothing against your speakers, I heard them few times and thought that other then the silly side firing woofers, that sounds completely disengaged from the speakers, they were actually very pleasant.
I am using wolcott audio tube amps
I have owned the Temptation and evidence and the MBL 101 E I now own the YG Pros they blow everything else away.
The reason why people buy YG speakers is because it is the best sounding speaker they ever heard. I am a dealer for them I was an MBL dealer. I have lots of MBL speakers in my showroom for people to buy and nobody buys them when they compare them to the YG speakers. The best thing that YG do better than any other speaker is they sound great with any type of Music. You can play Led Zepplin or Bach they never sound Harsh. They are one of the few speakers designed with computer aided tools. If you go to the YG factory you can see the technology they use is way superior to every other speaker manufacturer.
Marcmen, I heard the YG Anat IIs at CES. For whatever reason they sounded outstanding, but at $120K, they should.