Kharma CRM 3.2F vs. Avalon Eidolon and Diamond

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.

Getting back to the original topic which was Kharma 3.2 vs Avalon Eidolon (How quickly we forget).

I have owned both. I bought a pair of Eidolons in 1999, kept them 5 years, loved them, but decided to try something else.

Among others, I bought a pair of Kharma CRM 3.2FE speakers and initially I thought them to be incredible. The sound was glorious, Instrument placement was perfect, Soundstage - wide, deep and holographic. Everything about the speaker seemed to be sheer perfection. . . . Until . . . I listened for extended periods . . . and then . . . Headaches . . .dizzyness. . . disorientation . . . The worst case of listener fatique I had ever experienced.

While this speaker does sound fantastic, I absolutely cannot listen to it.

I have experienced the same sensation with other speakers - up to and including the highly touted Wilson Watt/Puppy 7.

The problem seems to be the Focal inverted dome titanium tweeter that is common to several of the speakers I've had problems with. Many have said that the Wilsons cause listener fatigue. I had not heard this about the Kharmas.

I loved the Kharma speakers until I just couldn't listen to them any more.

I sold them and have bought another pair of Avalon Eidolons. Not only do they sound "as good as" the Kharmas, but I can listen to them for hours on end with no problems whatever.

For my money, the Avalons are perfect.

well. yoiu are 100% right. wilson audio watt puppy and kharmas share the same xover topology(i will not tell what but it is with recpect to manufacturers but it is completely diferent that most speakers have ) that makes sound very open detailed and "light" . but focal tweetes and accuton ceamic drivers maks some ringing in this xover topoly. with very good components(very expensive silver paper in oil caps, foil inductors)it can be reduced. but no manufactures will put 800eur costing caps to 30 000eur speakers. its just too expensive for them. avalon eidolon are more technical sounding (like jmlab utopia) with ordinary xovers also xover slopes is sharper. they sound more technical and not fatiquing.
greets

Renaissance Audio Labs-
Speakers Designs -
http://www.hi-end.tk

My friend and I own the above mentioned speakers: Kharma 3.2 and Avalon Eidolon. Not saying that once I dropped my Kharma's to his place for listening, but, myself, spent substancial time listening to his system.
My system is Kharma/Tenor OTL/ Wavac, and my friends Eidolon/ CAT /ARC Ref3.
In view of above, the comparison is of no use, as CAT is not for Kharma, and Tenor is not the match for Avalon.
Eventually you evaluate the system vs system, and that will be more fair way to do so.
I did enjoyed the Avalons playing music. They are great speakers. They are big, able to deliver massive soundstage and will fit well into the large room,and will fill it with music.
Kharma are speakers that will give you midrange and dynamics, I never heard any other speaker will reproduce.
The comparison of BMW and Mercedes is the fine one, but, refining it further, I'd say, compare two seater convertible sports car with large sedan wichever brand you'd like.
You feel so great in two seater sports car, but you miss a bit of the space of a large car.
As we are close friends, we made a few steps to get into something common in the sound. I bought the CRM Sub to make sound more large scale, and my friend tuned his system to improve the dynamics, and midrange to match that of Tenor/Kharma combo.
What do I like is what I do have.
I like the bar, where I can be alone or with a few friends, getting finest drop of cognac, with Keith Jarrett playing intimately, just for you. This is Kharma as I see it.
If you like the large concert hall, where music is amplified and soundstage is big, this is Avalon for you.
There is no answer what is better. No one will convince Avalon owner, that Kharma is the better speaker overall.
This is matter of taste. My taste is Kharma, and I do think this is superior to Eidolons in overall texture.
My friend, I think, believe the same, although he never confessed.