2. speakers
  3. 1270954246

Reference 3a mm de capo vs. ProAc Response 2

So here's the conundrum. I've got a Fisher 500c- 35 watts of vintage tube power (with several mods done to it-namely updated power supply and signal path) and currently have a pair of Vandersteen 2ce's. Not the best match, due to the Vandy's moderate efficiency, though still nice. Not especially dynamic and a bit congested on the frequency extremes.
So in search of a better speaker to match the Fisher, I've done lots of research on Reference 3A's and Proacs, which I'm told both work well with tubes.

So please, have any of you listened to both of the speakers in the title? If so, how would you characterize their strengths and weaknesses? Which did YOU prefer and why?
As for my tastes, I enjoy old school R&B, 50s-60s jazz, classic rock, some pop, bluegrass, reggae, folk. Not really concerned about classical. And my source is an Eastern Electric MiniMax CDP. No vinyl (yet).

Thanks a bunch for your valued opinions! Lincoln

PS- yes I'm working hard to arrange a listen to both of them myself, but Tucson, AZ, is a bit removed from lesser known brands. :)
lincnabby
dopogue
1,773 posts
 
I can speak to the Response 2 but not the Reference 3A. I replaced a pair of Magnepan III speakers with the ProAcs and my friends considered me nuts. But they sounded MUCH better on tubes (then CJ MV75A1s). And even better on low-watt SET amps designed and built by a friend. I eventually sold the ProAcs to this friend and he has them still. Superbly musical speakers, very tube-friendly (obviously). I now consider them boxy-sounding, compared to my Gallo Reference 3s, but I sure didn't then. Good luck, Dave
jaybo
4,478 posts
 
proac
martykl
3,578 posts
 
As different as you can get.

I previously have owned deCapos and a former colleague owned R2s at the same time. We spent a lot of time working together in front of my speakers or his. Both of us were using primarily vinyl and lowish powered tube amps.

The deCapo has a "laid back" or "polite" tonal balance. Some will find it wonderfully transparent, revealing and musical. Others will find it dull.

The ProAc is more forward and dynamic. Much more energy from the presence region through the high end. Exciting or edgy, depending on who is doing the evaluation.

I don't want to overstate it, because both are good speakers, but they do - IMHO - occupy opposite ends of the "reasonably neutral" tonal spectrum for monitors.

My guess is that most people will strongly prefer one or the other. At the end of the day, I'd personally go with the ProAcs, but they're really not my long term cup of tea, either.

Good Luck

Marty
lincnabby OP
56 posts
 
I'm beginning to lean toward the ProAc R2's myself, but I am a bit leery about appropriate stands for them too. All reviewers strongly recommend $700 Target stands that are no longer in production. Does anyone know of a modern day substitute that would fit the bill?

Also, thank you to all of you who've commented so far.

Dave, I'm tempted to go for the Gallo Ref 3's but then I'd have to look at all new amplification too!
Marty, what is your current cup o' tea?
Are there any other suggestions for a fairly efficient $1500 or less used speaker?
Thanks again for any feedback!
More to discover