Kharma 3.2 to MidiGrand Upgade???


Anyone have experience in upgrading from the 3.2 CRM enigma to the Midi Grand Ceramiques w enigma?

What improvements/benefits can be had and you've experienced? Very interested in what is possible with low powered tube amps, specifically Lamm ML2.1's etc.

On paper the Midis are more efficient. Are they easier to drive than the 3.2's or does their impedance dip more significantly than with the 2 ways? Also interested in feedback regarding room size, bass integration, etc.

I'm interested also in any comments regarding the new ceramique sub and if its necessary / integrates well with the midis. I am seeking to be able to reach realistic symphonic levels with content loaded classical music and heavy electronica.
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xowl
Keith & Howie It's not a true 30x40 rectangle. Where the speakers are placed it's actually 18 ft wide then behind the listening area opens to a bar area and then a pool table behind which sits a desk- my "office". There are a lot of juts and irregularities which I've found breaks up room nodes. The entire room is over a 3 car garage and a stairway to the basement, if that helps you to visualize the space. I do find that a lot of bass gets lost into the garage below from large speakers I've had in the past, like the Dynaudio Temptations, Wilson Watt Puppy 7's and Avantgarde Duos. The speakers are positioned about 3 feet from the sidewalls and 6 ft from the back walls so they'r spread out about 12 ft from tweeter to tweeter. There is a large picture window behind the left speaker which also tends to leak bass. At the back of the room is a stairway to the downstairs level which, coincidentally also leaks bass. I honestly am shocked at the bass I do get, specifically the quality, but it certainly isn't flat to 50hz I'd guess. I have a radio shack digital spl meter but haven't been able to figure the darned thing out or find my test discs, so I have no Idea what the room is doing objectively.

Thom Y. Are you from Radiohead? One of my favorite progressive bands, i have to say. If you're interested in GOA, I'm just starting to collect but if you like some of the ambient stuff that Radiohead has started doing, you may like something like Hooverphonic's New sterophonic sound spectacular, The Orb, or Future Sound of London. More towards the trance side, bands like Troll, Holophonia, Geiger, Abnormal, Ego Traum are places to start. My favorites in the Genre though are the Israeli group Infected Mushroom and Juno Reactor.

Carl. I agree with everything you've said, if you like it why change and that is why I've purchased the subwoofer and will see what that's like before deciding on moving up from the 3.2's. I may be DONE at that point and feel no need to move up to the other speakers, or that may be an itch, I just gotta scratch, for better, the same or slightly different or worse. Come to think of it, I'm not a big fan of doggie bags...
I have to disagree. I have heard the subwoofer on several occasions and definitely do not feel it intergrates well with the 3.2's or Midi Exquisite's. I feel the speaker is much better without the sub. Sorry Carl. :(

The 3.2's are a beautiful sounding speaker that have some limitations. They are not really made for a medium to large room. They are very good in a small and intimate environment.

Their strengths are obvious, but most people desire more from the speaker than it is capable of providing.
Hey Owl, 18ft wide is pretty wide but did you say that you found having the speakers close to the side walls to be better sounding? If you found that you didn't really get much more in the way of bass from larger speakers in your rooms, then the sub may indeed be the answer, but then again, you have more than enough room for a bigger speaker to integrate. In my room, I actually have a bass boost at 30hz and not much below that, so I was thinking it might be nice to have a sub that just fills the lower octaves.
I would be very interested in your listening impressions so keep us updated.
I promised to keep quiet after my last post.I lied.I find the little 3.2's too fascinating a speaker to keep quiet about.I did go to GTT AUDIO after they were displayed at the Stereophile show in N.Y.I wanted to hear them set up by the actual distributor,at his home/demo premises.I want to remind you I do not own Kharma.I own,and am very happy with a pair of Avalons,but,without resorting to any comparisons,I love those "little buggers" (the 3.2's).The GTT set up was all lamm.I brought my own Reference discs(both analog and digital).The 3.2's were set up in the basement,and were set up very well,based on what I heard.The basement,from what I remember,was fairly large.The speakers were appx.4 feet from side walls and I'd say about 8 ft from the back wall.the walls were concrete with a concrete floor.Ceiling height I think was around 7 or 8 ft.I can tell you this.I honestly thought there was a hidden sub in the room.This was before any Kharma sub existed.I just happen to run a REL STENTOR with my Avalons.I tell you this for perspective!I have been able to gat a fabulous blend due to very low crossover point and very low gain on the sub.This all in a dedicated room of 13x23x8 with concrete floors.Enough about my speaker set-up.The point I'm attempting to make is about the 3.2's.I'm trying to be brutally honest,and do not aspire to own the 3.2's,since I'm very pleased with my own stuff,but,I really do believe the 3.2's are one of the most unique designs I have ever had the pleasure of hearing.On to what I heard at GTT.Firstly I brought over some John Zorn film music on the TZADIK label.Stunning stuff,riffed with incredible detail(Zorn is a GENIOUS anyway)and fabulous LOW frequency detail.The sound of the CD was so detailed on this set up and the music so damn great that the young sales guy asked me if he could burn the CD for demo use.The bass response on Synth and organ,while not quite up to my Ava-Rel set-up was stunning/magical/"RIGHT",even with a slight lack of deep impact.I didn't care about any slight loss of depth because the speakers told me to "just listen to what we offer up to you".UNBELIEVEABLE coherence,that I really heard none of when the same set up was demoed at HE 2005 with the sub.I know this was show conditions,but after reading so much good press(except SENSIBLE SOUND)who heard it as I did,I must say that I would gladly live with the 3.2's alone.At my GTT listening session I,also,brought some first pressing Mercury recordings.The FIREBIRD with DORATI,and an FR-1 pressing.This opens with double bass that you "feel".Real weight.My home set-up does this with more weight.This is still IMO not an issue with the 3.2 w/o sub as there is a real "MAGIC" that I believe is due to the extreme simplicity of that design.I truly believe that when you add to it's complexity with the Kharma sub,or any sub,you lose something of that magic.We live in a society of "Bigger is Better"hype.Bigger cars.Bigger houses,T.V's.swimming pools.Bigger tennis rackets.Larger hitting areas on bigger golf clubs.Heck,bigger boobs.Bigger,Bigger,Bigger.Companies(including Kharma)make more money selling this to us and ingratiating reviewers to reinforce this.The only real "boob" here (To ME)is the yutz that takes a zen-like simple design of the 3.2 and upgrades to a 'bigger""better"one.If that actually exists!The fact is I think the 3.2 IS THE BEST SPEAKER IN THE LINE.I'll bet,behind closed doors,so does Van Oosterum!But he will never admit it.Nor would any distributor.You see they want their bigger cars and houses too!!