Anyone compared GoldenEar Triton 7 with Triton Reference?


Hi folks -- newbie here.

Has anyone compared GoldenEar Triton 7s with GoldenEar Triton References?

Asking because I have Triton 7s + subwoofer, and am looking to upgrade. So I auditioned [7’s + subwoofer] and References side by side at 2 different dealers, playing my own music, and switching back and forth repeatedly between the two sets. To my ears, the References provided maybe 40% bigger soundstage, and maybe 5-10% better detail and clarity. This was surprising to me, given the large difference in price points: $8.5K for Reference vs. maybe $3K for Triton 7 + sub. (Maybe my ears aren’t experienced enough to appreciate the differences...?)

Has anyone directly compared the 7s and Refs in similar listening environments? How did you think they compared?  (How much better did you think the Refs were...?)

Thanks!
otinkyad
I'm not at all surprised by your findings based on my auditions of the 7s, 2s, and 1s. I have one of their ForceField subs and like it, but found their Triton series incredibly overpriced. Revel Performa series is a much better value - the same for Monitor Audio's offerings at respective price points. 
Post removed 
First off, I don’t think I listen like most. I played in the band in school. I soon realized that specs were essentially meaningless and contributed nothing to musicality. Later, I was a recording engineer. A system may have flat frequency response yet its phase and time coherence is non-existent and thus unlistenable! It’s not the Frequency. It’s the Time!

The sine qua non of a system is that it emotes. By that I mean it draws me into the music, all but disappearing from my consciousness. It does not matter if it is an early Miles mono, Hendrix Live @ Monterrey or Verdi Requiem, I must be engaged. When friends first hear my system, they tap their toes, bob their head, play air guitar because they are involved.

Countless store demos have lost me by bar 2. If I think there is potential, I ask to move the speakers to maximize performance, if I think it’s possible.

For me, it’s all about imaging. Whether a DI bass, Marshall stack, vocal or horn section, the sonic image must not move on a recording. Close mic’d vocals must be small and in the plane of the speakers. Any slap or reverb must be accurately delineated. The thwack and heft of a kick must be coplanar. One should ’see’ the recording ’space’ whether that space be silicon, stone or Symphony Hall.

Too many systems present a large ’image’ but it is homogenous not holographic. Close mic’d vocals are smeared between the speakers. Slapped bass jumps fore and aft. Thwack and heft are miles apart and heading in opposite directions.

Which brings us to the Tritons. The present a reasonably good image. Perhaps not holographic, but far better than several well regarded brands at several price multiples. They drew me into the music.

Regarding the Refs vs 7s, one must match the speaker size to the room. When I heard the Refs they were in a large [800ft²?] home theatre sized room that could seat perhaps a dozen or more people comfortably on sofas. The 7s were heard in a room similar to my ~600ft² media room. I moved both to maximize their imaging potential. Both gave excellent sound stages for my 3 reference tracks. The Refs would over power my room and the 7s would require a sub or two for optimal bottom octaves. But in their respective environments, both systems engaged me. So much so that I made it through all three reference tracks. Most store demos don’t.

IMO, while multiple woofers are a bad idea Tritons ameliorate it somewhat with their sloped baffle. Ported / Resonator speakers compromise phase for efficiency, subs are mandatory for all but the largest systems, mains should always have their low end crossed over to the subs, most subs have inadequate controls for proper integration, most audiophile’s rooms are just sonically awful being devoid of proper treatment either with furnishings or acoustic panels, and WAF is highly over valued.

Unless one is willing to place the speakers where they must be situated and treat the room appropriately, don’t waste your money.
Not a side by side comparison, but I owned a set of Triton 7s for 3 years (which I recently replaced with a set of Ohm 1000s) and have also heard the T-Refs at the local dealers in a living room enviornment, using my music.

Golden Ear does have an excellent, and very consistent "house sound" that is reflected in all of their speakers from the Aons on up the line. (I also still have a set of Aon 2s in an office.) The T-Refs certainly have better bass and, properly powered, have a greater sense of ease due to their dynamic range. However, they are simply too big for my listening room.

I was very pleased with the natural and accurate sound of the T-7s and consider them an excellent buy. If you have the necessary room and your listening habits need the extra oomph provided by the T-Refs, I would also consider them a good deal.  The only drawback of all the GE speakers is a narrow sweet spot. That is the primary reason I now have a set of Ohms.
The only drawback of all the GE speakers is a narrow sweet spot.
Interesting. I've never found a narrow sweet spot to be a defect but a strength.

Mixing on a nebulous speaker makes it difficult to create a sound stage whereas one with pinpoint focus makes it a doddle. On playback, a narrow sweet spot more easily recreates what the engineer intended. 

IMO, there is only one place to listen and that is the "engineer's" chair. Anyone who comes to listen sits there.