B & W 805 S or Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor ?

[Dunstan]

Hi,

This is my first posting. I would like some advice on the choice of speakers. There is only 1 high end audio dealer where I live and they don't have the speakers I want. I might not be able to test the speakers as I will be ordering them from overseas. I am currently using ProAc Tablette Reference 8 Signature speakers with Quad CD P-2 Cd player and Quad 909 power amp. I am thinking of upgrading my speakers to either the B & W 805 S or the Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor. I listen to mostly light classical (sonatas, concertos chamber music) and vocals (Diana Krall, Stacey Kent, Nat king Cole, Frank Sinatra). Can anyone tell me which speakers would be better for me and why (assuming that price is not a factor) ? Thanks !

[Lex]

Sonus faber generally lend themselves well to your kind of music. The Cremona Auditors have been well reviewed, and you should be able to find lots of info on the web for them. I never heard them myself. The guys here can tell you more about the B&W's than I can. We lost our dealer here due to closure on both lines.

Doug

[Aldo]

You are at Club B&W, I don't think our opinion is going to give you any partial advise!
The Cremonas look great though!

[LikeCoiledSteel]

I demoed the Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor and found it a bit underwhelming. It coule have been the electronics they were using as the speakers were in a room full of other speakers and thier gear was not up to snuff. However, the Sonus Faber Cremona towers I listened to, using Krell gear was incredible. Probably the best I have heard to date. The 805's may serve you best. Try to demo both if you can. Both are great companies.
Steel

[tboooe]

I listened to the entire Sonus Faber line before deciding on B&W. The SF's are great speakers if you like lush, liquid, sweet sounding music. The sound is incredible and romantic. It is soo easy to just sit back, curl up with a good merlot and book and let the music wash over you. Becuase of this relaxed characteristic I would mate the SF's would a great SS amp and preamp that may be a bit more revealing. In my demo the SF's were hooked up to the older X series gear from Pass Labs.

I ultimately went with B&W becuase I prefer to be a bit more engaged with the music. The best way I can describe it is the B&W are for the active listener and the SF's are for the passive listener.

Hope this helps!

[Nick M]

Plan your next vacation to a major city and test drive the speakers yourself with your music. It's really the only way.

Both are very well rated by the people who like their characteristics. I'm a Paradigm/Thiel fan, but in the end my words will probably be just as helpful as anyone elses because we don't have your ears. :T

I can tell you that the 805's are fairly anemic (like most other medium sized 2-way monitors) and definetly need a sub - especially for the upright bass that frequents Diana Krall's tracks, and cellos/drums in orchestral tuneage. Never tried the SF. But you may not mind it if you listen passively at low volumes while doing other things. It would drive me crazy though if I was just sitting down with the music turned up a bit looking to be entranced.

[RobP]

Welcome to the HTGuide Dunstan!

[Dunstan]

Thanks guys for the feedback ! Appreciate them. From what you have said , I am leaning more towards the 805 S at the moment though I have check out the prices with overseas dealers and it seem that the the 805 S costs more. Will try to test them when I go on my vacation in Dec. Hope I can convince the wife of my need to upgrade. Wish me luck !!

[Karma]

HI,
Good luck. If the wife prevents the upgrade trade her for the speakers. :rofl: Well, I guess that's not realistic. I've been single too long!

Sparky

[scottielee]

for your reference, in USA, the Auditors retail about $4,000 with stands while 805S are about $2,500 with stands.

[Race Car Driver]

Sonus Faber... MMMM

[Karma]

for your reference, in USA, the Auditors retail about $4,000 with stands while 805S are about $2,500 with stands.

HI,
Maybe with discounts those 805S prices are right. But full retail is $2500 for the speakers and $750 for the dedicated stands. The stands are expensive but worth the money, I think. I have them and love them both for appearance and function.

Sparky

[Dunstan]

Judging solely by the price of the speakers in the US, the price difference between the SF Auditors and 805 S seems to suggest that the SF Auditors are in a league above the 805 S. Am I correct in saying this ? Or is it just that there is very little difference between the sound quality of these two speakers but it's just that they have different characteristics ?

My personal preference is for speakers with greater transparency, detail and clarity with a good soundstage and imaging. Which of these two speakers is better when it comes to transparency, detail, clarity, soundstage and imaging ?

[Nick M]

Sounds to me like you haven'y listened to many varietals of speakers. Perhaps when you visit your next hifi shop you should start from square one. Tell the floorman you want to listen to a variety of his best monitors.

[tboooe]

Judging solely by the price of the speakers in the US, the price difference between the SF Auditors and 805 S seems to suggest that the SF Auditors are in a league above the 805 S. Am I correct in saying this ? Or is it just that there is very little difference between the sound quality of these two speakers but it's just that they have different characteristics ?

My personal preference is for speakers with greater transparency, detail and clarity with a good soundstage and imaging. Which of these two speakers is better when it comes to transparency, detail, clarity, soundstage and imaging ?

dunstan, i would say the 805s are better in the things you listed above. the sonus fabers are just very romantic, and nice sounding speakers but I think they lack the dynamics of the 805s. that being said, there are other speakers out there that are better than the 805s in the areas you mentioned. you may want to look at dynaudio, jm focal labs, and usher. hope this helps.

[Nick M]

I hate to toot my own horn, but it sound like he's describing a speaker on the more forward end of the scale. For instance I love Diana Krall. With my speakers, I can hear the moistness of her mouth as she opens up to sing. For those who don't understand what I'm saying, go into a quiet room of your home and close your mouth with your tongue resting against the room of your mouth. Then open your mouth. You will hear a mid-high frequency sound of your saliva releasing from the suction created by pulling your tongue from your palate. I can hear it cleanly with my setup. I find this hard to hear with the 805's and 803's I listened to. Same with strings and brass. The B&W's imaged great, but I felt like I was listening to a recording rather than instruments. I wasn't hearing all those details like the harmonics between the string and fret or wet reed of a sax. To me the B&Ws are easy to listen to, but don't bring out all the details that scream "this is a guitar" rather than "this is a great recording of a guitar".

Anyhoo, thats just my ears - but by what you descirbe here and your apparent level of uncertainty I think you should look at more than the neutral/laid back sounds (to my ears anyways) of B&W's.

[Karma]

HI NIcholas,
I think your description of the sounds you hear are classic and very insightful. I see very few descriptions as accurate as yours on this or any other site. I suspect you have superior hearing.

That being said I would venture that you should take a close look at electrostatic speakers. They excell at the very things you write about. My reference are the Martin Logan CLS IIA's which, unfortunately, are no longer being made. When coupled with, for example, my Audio Research tube electronics, the kind of detail and resolution you speak about is there in spades. They have the qualities that separates reality from hi fi. As much as I like some SS equipment and some conventional speakers, it's really no contest in a direct shootout.

I have never heard conventional speakers or solid state electronics do these things as well, independent of cost.

Those are my thoughts as well as my compliments.

Sparky

[tboooe]

sparky, great recommendation. Sometimes I forget about electrostats but they are so very clear, dynamic, and uncolored...

[Nick M]

Karma - Thanks man, but I definetly don't have golden ears. However, I do tend to pay attention to things a bit more than most. I also don't have cable, so I spend a lot more time listening to music than the average joe.

Interesting on the tube stuff. I listened to a couple tube amps before, and didn't really like them. They seemed to warm the bass up and roll off the top end. Not sure all tube amps are like that though. It sounded silky smooth, but nowhere near as crisp as solid-state. I have heard that tube pre-amps with Class A solid state amps sounds good... but haven't tried that before (something to try in the future for sure).

I'd also like to sit down and do some more extensive blind tests between class A and class A/B amps.

I've heard about electrostats, but haven't done much listening with them. I've heard that they have difficulties producing pinpoint imaging. Do you find that to be true? I've also heard that aside from that flaw, they produce the most realistic sound available. Whats the deal with powering them? I went to Magnepan's site and they won't even list information on it. I know they're hard to drive, but what are we talking here? 200W? 300W? 600W?

I plan on returning to my local hifi shop to audition the new S4's for the hell of it. I think when I go I'll try out a pair of electrostats as well as the tube pre/solid state combo.

[ColoKurt]

Speaking of Sonus Faber, I listened to the Amati Anniversarios over the weekend at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest. Holy crap! What a great sounding speaker! It was coupled with all Musical Fidelity electronics. It was the best sounding system I have ever heard. Of course, the retail for the whole system is ~$50k so I guesss it should sound pretty damned good.

[tboooe]

Colokurt, SF is VERY nice. It seems that every SF setup I have ever seen or heard uses SS electronics on the front end that are known for being a tad bright or aggressive. This mates well with the SF house sound of being a bit lad back and dark (to me). My preference would be to do the opposite and find a speaker that is revealing and dynamic and mate it with the proper electronics to get the right mix of warmth, smoothness, etc. Just my opinion...bottom line the SF are great speakers.

[Karma]

HI Nicholas,
I don't want to hyjack this very good thread. So, I'll try to make this short. Don't be sucked in by the stereotyped descriptions of tube sound. There is far more variation with tube amps than SS amps. It ranges all the way from very soft and lush to fast and detailed with outstanding resolution. What all tube amps do have in common is lack of grain; better than any SS amp. Audio Research is my favorite which seem to combine the best qualities of tubes and SS. But that's just me.

As for electrostatic imaging, it can be outstanding. But they are quirky and usually require more effort optimizing the sound field than conventional speakers. When it's done right, the imaging will make you jump out of your socks.

Electrostatic speakers are intolerant of anything but the best amplification. Their resolution is so good that they will reveal weaknesses in the audio chain that lesser speakers don't notice. Also, they can be difficult to drive because of a very unforgiving impedance curve. That's why most ESL owners go with SS which is a shame. My AR amp is very powerful (250W/channel) and tolerates the CLS impedance curve very well. This is not true of all tube amps.

Of course, ESL's don't do bass well so a good sub(s) is almost essential. A lot of folks don't want to hassle with the quirks of ESL's. But, again, if done right they are astonishing and will spoil you for any other speaker type.

Maggies are not electrostaic designs in spite of their appearance. They are planar magnetic speakers which I like very much. But not as well as my stats. But they are probably easier to set up but are also difficult to drive for different reasons. They provide a lot of bang for the buck.

Sorry this was not shorter, Sparky

[Nick M]

Sorry, don't mean to hi-jack this either! ops:

Karma - Perhaps I should audition some more tube-amps. I only listened to a couple, and both had the effects I described above. The bass was still punchy and the overall sound was very smooth, but the highs seemed a bit faded and the low end wasn't as clear as the solid states I tried.

Perhaps I'll find a place that has the higher end Martin Logan stuff then. Those are true electrostats right?

Well, if anything we're providing the original poster with more ideas! :B

[Karma]

Hyjack, Hyjack! More on the ML CLS IIA's (I'm sorry, I can't resist)

HI Nicholas,
Yes, Martin Logan speakers are true electrostatics----sort of. ML has been trying to address the bass problem for a number of years. Their solution is using electrostatic panels for the range of lower mid to the top treble and an integrated conventional woofer for the bass. I'm not entirely happy with the results. There is always the issue of the marriage of the extremely fast stat panels to the ponderous woofer. It's a difficult problem to solve and I don't think ML has entirely resolved it. I don't think anyone has (except me :T :W ) .

I understand their more recent integration attempts are better. Could be--I haven't heard them.

Due to a lack of sales, the CLS series has been discontinued. These are true full range stat panels with no crossovers. In my view these are the best speakers ever produced by ML. They are also the most demanding. As is always the case with ESL's, bass is the buggaboo. They are really not happy much below about 80Hz eventhough they are specified to 35HZ. In the low bass they not only roll off, they also can't handle the dymamic range. Without help, they have real limitations. If you understand the problems of the panels front to back phase cancillation that occurs at bass frequencies and the equalization needed to extend the bass output you will understand the issue.

I took the problem and solved it myself. It's pretty easy. All it takes is money, a little creativity and some determination. That is the issue. Most are not willing to spend what it takes. I use a combination of passive (for the panel amp) and active (for the sub amp) crossovers and biamp my system. The panels are driven by my Audio Research tube amp and the dual subs are driven by a Levinson Model 23 amp at 400w per channel at 4 ohms, the impedance of my subs. I cross the system over at a very low 67 Hz. That's part of the secret. The crossover frequency is critical to my solution. It has to do with hiding the transition between the panels and the subs in a room resonant node frequency, in this case the floor to ceiling resonance. I guarantee you that you would not be able to hear the transition between the panels and the subs. This is a big key to the success of this system.

The result is a coherent frequency response from sub 20Hz to light with dynamic range adequate for loud rock or 1812 canons. My listening room is a broken up 28X26 feet; fairly large. But the speakers still do fine.

If you are interested, I would suggest that you look into a pair of used CLS IIA's or CLS IIZ's. They can be had quite cheaply on Audiogon. Don't buy the original CLS's (no suffix). They still had teething problems. Better yet, get a pair with damaged panels for almost nothing then replace the the panels with new ones ($700 for the pair). They are still available from ML. They replace easily, I'm told.

Here is a link to a series of Stereophile reviews. Read the entire series. I think you will find them interesting.

http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/650/

Before ending, I should note that power, per se, is not the issue with amps. Rather, it is stability. Most high end (not Rotel; sorry folks) SS amps with at least 100W per channel will do fine. But tube amps will have a harder time. With tubes I think higher power is needed and even then, stability could be an issue. One of the reasons I so love the Audio Research D250 MkII Servo amp is its ability to sound great with these speakers. This is definitely a case of choosing the speakers first then finding a compatable amplifier.

If you are up to the challange presented by these speakers, they will reward you with long-lasting freedom from up-grade-itus.

Good Luck, Sparky

[Race Car Driver]

For instance I love Diana Krall. With my speakers, I can hear the moistness of her mouth as she opens up to sing.

I know exactly what your talking about. One of the first things I noticed when I first listened to one of her albums.

[Joey_V]

I think that the older MLs (Ascent, etc) display a bit of a bass/panel incoherence and an anemic extension/response down low in addition to the dissociation. However, the third generation is better integrated as many people believe that ML has solved the bass/panel problem.... or atleast improved on it leaps beyond what they had in the 2nd generation ML speakers.

I have the Summits, and I think that they are stunning speakers.... bass, mids, highs, everything.

Also, Karma, they are making a new pair of the CLS... they are called the CLX and they are coming out next year.

Joey

[Karma]

HI Joey,
Thanks for the news. I did not know that. I would like to think that my input to ML had something to do with this development. I have complained bitterly multiple times about the CLS's demise to ML's management.

Well, I really don't think I had anything to do with it. All things like this are business decisions. I do know that many hard core audiophiles were very disappointed to see one of the all time great speakers bite the dust.

I'm looking forward to future developments.

I'm not surprised you love your ML's. They really do make great speakers.

Sparky

[Joey_V]

Sparky,

With these new developments, would you be willing to listen to the CLX and if they jive with your audio needs and desires, are you going to upgrade to the CLX from the CLS? Is this a possibility for you?

Also, I will add, I heard the Magnepan 3.6 yesterday running on Classe and Ayre gear and I thought that it was phenomenal. The salesperson, interestingly enough, has the CLS and I asked him about it.... he conceded that he felt the Magnepan 3.6 is an all around better speaker.

Sparky, you should listen to a properly demoed and powered Magnepan 3.6.

JOey

[Karma]

HI Joey,
Would I upgrade? Sure if I thought the new speaker was better. But it's going to have to be very good. Optimizing ones system for any good speaker is a process, one that takes a lot of time and money. So the new speaker would have to knock me on my ass for me to be willing to go through the process.

Remember, the secret to any great audio system is synergy; all the individual pieces contributing to a unified whole. This means that the entire electronics chain, the cables, the speakers, the room, and most importantly, our taste must harmonize as perfectly as possible. It's a difficult task but fun. I have been through this with several different systems but I've been most successful with the CLS's.

As far as the dealer is concerned, I agree with him to a point. First, the Maggie 3.6 is a hell of a speaker. A friend of mine has a pair and they always blow me away. Comparing the 3.6 to the CLS IIA is an interesting exercise. I actually think that if a person is not willing to walk the extra mile, the Maggies are the best solution. They are more balanced in their performance. I have walked the extra mile. My system is better than my friends and he agrees. It's not totally a matter of money. It's how you fit the pieces together. I think the CLS IIA's simply have more potential.

If we consider optimized systems, where the synergy is is nearly perfect, the CLS IIA's will best the Maggies, good as they are. Understand, most dealers are confined to the equipment they have access to. That makes it very difficult for them to have the freedom to optimize. It just costs too much time and money. By far the best and most knowledgable audiofiles I have known were not dealers. So I will make note of his opinion and continue down my merry path.

One more thing. I have been listening to Magnaplanar speakers for 30 years. I've always liked them. In fact, I have owned planar magnetic speakers made by Apogee. They were put out of business when they lost a patent infringement suit to Magnapan. Pity because the Apogee speakers were better; in fact some of the best I have ever heard.

And Joey, you should listen to a properly set up CLS system.



Sparky

[Joey_V]

And Joey, you should listen to a properly set up CLS system.

Sparky

Touche.

Well... when are you inviting me over??

Joey :T

[Karma]

I have the Summits, and I think that they are stunning speakers.... bass, mids, highs, everything.

Also, Karma, they are making a new pair of the CLS... they are called the CLX and they are coming out next year.

Joey

Hi Joey,
I called ML today to get their version of CLX developments. They advised not to expect anything before 2008. It seems they are in the "gee, should we actually build this speaker" phase.

Initially, I thought they were in the conceptual stage but then they dropped a hint that may mean they are really serious. I was told their new subs have a switch setting labeled "CLX". Apparently it is intended for the new speakers.

So, I did not come away holding my breath for the CLX's. I did get the feeling that they wanted to build another full range speaker. But......well, who knows??

Another thing I picked up was a lot of enthusiasm for your Summits. I have not heard them because our local ML dealer isn't anymore. The next time I'm in Denver I will make a point of listening to the Summits.

Too bad Chicago is so far away. Do you ever get into New Mexico? If not, you should. We have the BEST Mexican food here. And a few good hi fi systems too :T .

Sparky

[calb]

B&W 805 or Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor

I listened to both speakers and found the 805 more relaxed and natural sounding. The Cremona Auditor are involving once you adapt to their balance but for me they are too bright. They sound better with valve amplification. The 805 have a very natural sound only may be a little too smooth. I also found they lack something in the bass region.I found the Auditor does a better job here for the lack of bass is not so obvious but of course both these speakers lack real deep bass. To sum up I would say the Auditor is the more dramatic and attention grabbing but lack some relaxation and the 805 is the more natural sounding but may be a shade too smooth and lacking bass.

[AlanB]

I have used Electa Amators and Guarneri's. The Guarneri's are far better than the Auditors and in my opinion the 805S's beat them all. In the past I have tried Magnaplanars but although they sounded great on demo they were awful in my room. They need loads of space. Space is at a premium in most UK houses plus we usually have solid interior walls hence the bass doesn't 'fly out the window'. I have also used Rogue, Croft and Unison Research tubed amplifiers and nice as they are I have returned to SS. Musical Fidelity Nu Vista which has those little Nu Vista valves. This gives me 250wpc of sheer beauty - SS slam and control with the liquidity of valves added. The Kw 500 is even better. One of my favourite speakers was the Quad ESL63 but don't like the new Quad stuff with the added bass. The same goes for the ML Vantage and Clarity. The purity of the 63's is lost and these new stats sound very like dynamic speakers to me ears. The 805S's with sympathetic matching throughout the rest of the system have given me a very similar sound to 63's with better bass. This is of course my opinion and we audio people have vastly different thoughts on the same subject. Respect others emotions on Hi Fi but if it doesn't ring your bell be polite but discard it until you find YOUR nirvana.

[Rolex]

Calb, that's the first time I've heard someone say the auditors were too bright. I wonder if it wasn't your electronics.

FWIW, I love the 805S. I've owned the nautilus 805, the signature 805, and the newer 805S and I would take the auditor over any of those any day of the week. In my opinion, the auditor is in a different league than the 805S.

[calb]

Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor and brightness

Rolex it wasn't the electronics, I listened to the Auditors through SS (Musical Fidelity A5) and valve amplification (Copland CTA 405, Jadis Orchestra and Prima Luna Prologue 1), all top gear as you see.
In fact the Cremona Auditor don't really have have the typical Sonus Faber lush sound. Let me quote for example the Hi Fi Choice review of that loudspeaker - "There is supposed to be a family sound to Sonus Faber and their ilk - lovely finish, soft and squidgy sound (especially for the treble, which should be slugged as if socks are over the tweeter). If that's what you expect from the Cremona Auditor, you'll be happily disappointed. This is a clean, quicksilver, dynamic sound with plenty of insight into treble detail. Almost too much detail - zingy solid-state amplifiers and forward sounding Nordost cables might push the Cremona Auditor into brightness".
The "Hi Fi News" review also states that "As with the Cremona, the Auditor has a sparkly rather than silky upper register.It exaggerates transients a bit, adds some bite to fast guitar or punchy brass, but also imparts a trace of metallic to some acoustic instruments.It is however so minor that it strikes me as a trivial anomaly".
That said I admit that the dealer's listening room could be adding some extra brightness too but in my opinion the 805's are more relaxed and natural sounding, albeit the Auditors are more dynamic and very envolving once you adjust your ears to that slight brightness (that may be not so apparent to other ears /rooms).

[chinets]

B&W 805 and SF !!

I had the 805, and my brother has the SF. Both need Subs badly I'm afraid.
For vocals ,especially female, Jazz, classical music that is neutral and sounds Natural and warm go for those 805s anyday!!! :T

SF and 805 are both good looking ,In fact I prefer the look of the SF, but the sound of the B&W are superioor to my ears!!! ;x(

Keep us posted as to what you have chosen!!!!

Cheers!!

[Guy]

I found the Cremonas to be a little bright - don't remember what gear it was connected to. I did also find that they had very high SPL for a stand mount speaker. I ended up with the 805s not because they are better speaker but because it suited my taste.