Kharma CRM 3.2F vs. Avalon Eidolon and Diamond

I own Eidolon for almost nine years since it was introduced to the market. It is highly sensitive to placement and room accoustic. I remembered, for once, changing my backdrop curtain - a slight more thicker fabric, and the sound got suck up so seriously. It is also that sensitive to placement, even up to a slight move. With proper placement and the best electronics components you can feed, it never sounds thin to me. I have enough bass, deep and extended. The mids and reproduction of human voices are spooky and neither sounded thin to me ( a strong evidence to rebut mediocre mid bass of a ported design). It is so highly sensitive provided if only you hit the right "sweet" spot in term of right combination of components, placement and room accoutic, you would never able to exploit its full potential performance. When it comes to this level of performance, I believe it is more of a personal taste and choice. So, sorry to say that, it is absurb for someone to put so much negative comments to these speakers without hearing one with better setup.

In response to Vincentkkho,

I did hear the Avalon Eidolons once 5 year ago at a dealer and they sounded very dynamic in combination with a Spectral 150S, Spectral DMC 20 and Mark Levinson CD player.
But I heard them at other demonstrations recently and they sounded undynamic to me. The recent demonstrations were set up in a hurry I guess without paying enough attention to placement and room treatment so offcourse you are right about hitting the right sweet spot.
At home my experience is that the more I play the more dynamic they sound. That is why think there is a certain stifness of the woofers. Maybe also the humidity/temperature/electric mains plays a role.
I saw an article on Internet comparing different speakers (horn speakers from Germany), Kharma, the Marten Design, Sound Lab, Avalons Eidolons and Wilson Speakers and they had the same conclusion about the relation between reticense/laid back character of the midbas and amplifier power for the Eidolons. They also said that they expected that the design of Diamond version (and the newer Vision) is an attempt to solve this problem.
Furthermore: If I remember it correctly the test of Martin Collems of HFNRR mentions a certain darkness/dullness.
I have changed one year ago from thick carpetry to parquetry to get a more lively/less dull sound and that helped a lot for the high frequencies but of course did nothing for the midbas.

If you have a Spectral/MIT/Avalons set you will have a nicely balanced combination: the ingredients of the combination are not neutral but the total sum is (dependent on the room and placement of course).
So what is your combination?

I bought the Eidolons because I had electrostacic loudspeakers for about 20 years and I wanted 3-D electrostatic sound without the huge dimensions and necessity to use class A OTLs (I had 200 Watt Fourier Pantherres OTLS) to power them.
But nothing is perfect in this life and the Eidolons certainly are not. Eg with the change from Martin Logans Monolith-3 to the Eidolons the quality of the bas (eg piano) improved a lot but the enjoyment of listening to Baroque music decreased somewhat. Electrostatic speakers with tube amplifiers are per definitions optimal for Baroque.

I have changed one year ago from thick carpetry to parquetry to get a more lively/less dull sound and that helped a lot for the high frequencies but of course did nothing for the midbas -----COEN

Sad to learn this. Mine is with ceramic tile flooring, curtain about 5 to 6 feet behind the speakers. Hope to put up some pictures when I have the time to do it.

Nothing is perfect, but you have to go for the sound you like the most. I used a pair of Quad ESL63Pro for slightly more than 10 years. Prior to that, I owned verious versions of LS3/5a and, till date, still keeping with me not less than 6 pairs of these speakers.

My combination is as follows,

Nottingham spacedeck TT - 2 units
Triplanar7 - 2 units
Graham 2.2 - 1 unit
Morech DP-6 - 1 unit
Whest2.2, ASR Basis Exclusive, TomEvan TheGroove, and 47LabPhonocube serve as phonostages to various cartridges.
Burmester 969 CD Transport with 970D/A converter.
Preamp -- CAT Ultimate and CAT Ultimate MkII
Amp -- McIntosh 275 two units run in mono, Sovtek KT88 with cola bottle shape, LPS tubes for 12AT7 and 12AX7.
Burmester 948 Powder Conditioner -1 unit
Nordost Thor - 1 unit
Nordost QuottroFil tonearm cable
Nordost QuottroFil interconnect - 2 pairs
Nordost Valhalla interconnect - 1 pair
Nordost Tyr - 1 pair
Nordost Valhalla Digital connect RCA --1 pc
Nordost Valhalla Digital connect XLR - 1 pc
Nordost powder cord - 2 pcs
MIT 350CVT Twin - 1 pair Pre to amp
Cardas speaker cable.

Gone before this - for amp -- Jadis 500, VTL300, VTLIchiban, AudioResearch VT100MkII, Hurricane ASL etc.

Happy listening!

In response to Vincentkko,

I recently found out why the sound of my set up is so dull and liveless.
I had a VPI TNT HRX with VPI furnature: a steel frame with a 3 inch thick slab of wood.
The last 2 year I had a Creativ Big Reference rack with sand filled thick wooden shelfs.
I thought: well I have a professional rack now and I don't need these tip toes, Walker Valid points, Harmonix feet and seismic sinks ("bandages") anymore: wrong!!!!
Both the VPI furnature for the TNT and the Creativ racks give a mellow, dark, not very involving sound with not enough presence and not enough dynamics it components are placed directly on the wooden shelf. So all racks with thick wooden (sandfilled) shelfs are under suspicion.
So the English with their target racks with thin shelves and cheap Ikea tables for their LINN Sondeks are not completely crazy.

The dynamics, 3-D sound came back if a combination of tiptoes, Walker Valid Points and Harmonix feet are placed under the components.
So it is true that the room and audio furnature are often more colored than the components. So I someome tells you the components of his set you still don't have a clue of how it sounds.
Conclusion: the Eidolons are a little reticent in the midbas and are somewhat soft sounding but not so much as I thought a week ago.

My dealer wants to sell me a Finite element rack which should be less dark sounding as a Creativ rack: I am not shure whether the tiptoes, Walker Valid points, Harmonix feet and seismic sinks ("bandages") become obsolete with the Finite element rack : I don't think it is possible to get rid of material resonance for 100%.
Theoretically there are 3 solutions for audio furnature considering that all materials resonate:
-finite element calculations with tuning forks inserted in
the shelves
-air - seismic sinks
-contraint layer damping - symposium platforms

I bought a proven combination because of the problems with my set/(audio furnature): Spectral 4000 CD player, Spectral 250 power amplifier, MIT oracle cabling and Eidolons. Preamp is still a CAT Ultimate so I have to decide to go back to tubes (CAT JL2 or ARC) or buy a Spectral 30SL preamp. I had tubes for the past 15-20 years or so I hesitate.
Question: What is the difference between the Ultimate I and II?

I do not have the time anymore to keep such a long list of components as you have in good shape so went back to the basis and keep it relatively simple.
I had a Graham 2.2 in the past on my TNT V but the new VPI player (TNT HRX) couldn't be fitted with the Graham arm at the time (when I bought my HRX) and that was a pity- I rate the 2.2 more highly than the JMW memorial arm which is also somewhat mellow.

Regards,

Coen

I own maybe 15,000 Lps Eps consisting of 50's 60's recordings to 90s. Still continue to purchase Lp. I have many so called "junk record" sounded fabulously with my system. Come to this point in time, I do not ask for more. It takes me a long time to put my system together. Oops!I forgot to mention the Nordost Pulsar Point titanium and those sound tubes which I use to give the final touch for my setup.