rippingdragon

Item: I'm helping setup a family friend's son with his first hifi system. Working on a tight budget. Looking for a good entry level integrated amp in the $200-$300 price range. To be paired with a LSK M4 mini (8 ohm impedance, 84dB sensitivity) and used as a desktop / nearfield bedroom setup. Price Range: $200-300 Item Condition: New or Used

tem: DB25 male to 4+ RCA male cable Location: Melbourne Price: $30 incl. postage? Item Condition: as long as it's working I need to connect a mini dsp to an old receiver for my diy office system. Anyone have an old DB25 to RCA cable lying around? I need 4 channels. So any cable with 4+ connections should do (I've seen 6 and 8 connection models before).

Item: DB25 male to 4+ RCA male cable Location:Melbourne Price: $30? Item Condition: as long as it's working I need to connect a mini dsp to an old receiver for my diy office system. Anyone have an old DB25 to RCA cable lying around? I need 4 channels. So any cable with 6+ connections should do.

So good! Glad you enjoyed.

A friend is selling a Benchmark DAC1 paired with Dynaudio 110A active speakers: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Dynaudio-110-A-Speakers-Benchmark-DAC1-/221538946168

I'm looking for a Mini DSP with 2x in and 4x out. Preferably in a case already. http://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4 Budget: $60-70 depending on casing. Cheapie 4 channel power amplifier. Must handle 4 ohm loads. Otherwise no major requirements. Budget: $50-100 depending on quality. Thanks!

Sorry for the delayed response. I've been trying to get some things in my life sorted which meant less computer time and the removal of compulsive SNA browsing from my daily habits. I've at least been getting plenty of listening in. I can't believe the new toy syndrome hasn't worn off yet. I'm appreciating the capabilities and nuances of my system more with each passing day. It is absolutely the best HiFi purchase I have ever made. Then I come back here and find that I have some free upgrades waiting for me Stuart, Might have to be next weekend. I'll hopefully be out rock climbing this weekend (weather permitting).

It's been great weather for doing some riding of my own as well. Had an excellent ride this weekend and last thanks to the spring weather that has finally decided to show itself in Melbourne. Going to take a while to readjust to the saddle after being too lazy over winter though

You're sabotaging your metabolism there. Firstly 1500 calories a day seems quite low for someone with your level of exercise. Have a look around for some calorie calculators online, but I would hazard a guess that your maintenance calories would be somewhere in the 2500 range per day. It's not recommended to have a deficit of more than 500 calories per day over long periods of time as your body will start consuming your muscle for energy instead of your fats stores (which would explain the soreness). I'm not sure how you are eating, but it is also recommended to have 1 day per week of high calorie + carb intake to reset the balance of hormones that govern metabolism and decide where to take energy from in your body. It's no surprise that a long term calorie defict will put your body into self protect mode. Here's a very brief bit of reading on the subject.

On the other hand, I'm sure your ears and your heart want to know I've got a friend upgrading from a lesser Osborn system (Eclipses + Consonance M800s) to the CX3B bookshelves. He still lives in a share house so it will be installed in his average size bedroom. I can let you know how he goes with them in his room. Surely if you decided on going down the SGR route, you would be able to recoup most of the cost anyways by selling your current speakers and power amps on the second hand market. Although I'm afraid it might break the colour scheme you've got going there. Maybe you can put in a special order for a Jarrah finish

Meant to comment on this earlier. Is that a common expression that I haven't heard before? Or is that something you just came up with? I'm still chuckling at what your thought process must have been if you just came up with that expression. The mental image of you trying to cut through a banana with the amp is even more amusing

There is some significant boost of the lower frequencies in the crossover to get the low bass response so flat and deep (esepcially considering the driver size and sealed cabinet alignment) which sucks up most of the amplifier power. Even with the non-updated firmware I haven't tripped the protection in normal listening. It's only when I've been testing the speakers capabilities that I've had it trigger. SGR was very upfront about the volume limitations from the beginning. I was advised that if I wanted to really blast loud bassy music that a sub would be required. Using the provided electronics of the CX4F there is a built in sub-crossover at 40Hz which will relieve the speakers of the low frequencies (and their associated amplifier sucking boosting) freeing up a lot of headroom for dynamic passages and extra volume. You can also use the provided tuning capabilities to reduce the low end output to relieve some amplifier strain and increase your volume level at the expense of low end extension. I haven't felt it necessary to pursue either option, but I normally listen in the 80-85dB range so I may not be the best person to comment on this aspect. Thanks for mentioning Kruder Dorfmesiter and Leftfield. Hadn't given either a listen on the new system yet. Got K&D Sessions pumping now with some Leftfield in the playback queue.

That's at the LP (2.75M) . So the 1M dB output would be a bit higher again.

Black, black, or black?

Can you please have Harry take some pics of these before they head out the door? I'd love to see how they turn out.

I'm impressed you were able to drive it into clipping. When I had the lower powered EL15 on hand Stuart asked me to test the features and I had to drive it painfully loud with bass heavy music to get it to clip and my speakers were less sensitive than yours (87db vs. 91db). Did you have an SPL meter handy? How loud were you listening? Were you applying any EQ boost in any area?

Mine currently automatically reset. I think there is another update again that changes the protection sensitivity. It may have been bundled with your last firmware update. My LEDs don't blink when powered up either.

I've done a bit of testing to try and get the speakers to go into overload protection. I've had them playing comfortably at 90dB with most music in my large room. I tried upping them a bit more and was about to have to get earplugs when they shut-off at 92-95db depending on the track. However with music that has some serious low bass content they will go into protection mode when a large bass hit comes in but will otherwise play a sustained 90dB. I hadn't commented about it earlier because I still have an earlier version of firmware which runs the protection circuit very strictly. Stuart's going to come by soon and update it to some new firmware that's a bit more lenient about engaging protection mode and I'll report back on how they perform afterwards. Edit for clarification: all measurements were done from the listening position (2.75 meters away from the speakers).

I haven't posted in this thread until now because I was trying to get my own review finished first before commenting on someone else's. It was very well written and I devoured it earlier with great interest. Nice work EK! It's always interesting to see how SGR is perceived outside of the circle of SNA members. It was also good to see impressions from someone who doesn't own and hasn't committed money to purchasing one of the products. Unfortunately only a small portion of the review was devoted to the actual sonic qualities of the amp. I can understand this choice though as to most readers of Six Moons, SGR is an unknown entity. Furthermore, learning about SGR's philosophy and attention to detail does shed some light on what performance a listener could expect from their products, even if these particular qualities weren't elaborated on overly much in the review. I used to have a pair of passive Dynaudio C2's driven by a Musical Fidelity KW500 integrated amp. I upgraded to some active SGR speakers so both the amp and speakers had to go. My amp sold first and Stuart was kind enough to lend me the lower powered version, the EL15, so that I could continue to demo my speakers until they sold (talk about excellent service!). My speakers unfortunately sold within a week of borrowing the EL15 amp. Granted it was fortunate in that it did let me fund the upgrade but I wanted to hang on to it a little longer for some more listening. It was a cracker of an amp. The fact that my speakers sold so quickly after putting the SGR amp into the system also speaks highly of its performance, especially considering the fact that they had been on the market with no luck for three months prior to adding the amp into the system. The amp I replaced was certainly no slouch either being Musical Fidelity’s flagship $12,000 integrated amp at the time. When I put the EL15 in the system I was also lacking a preamp so I had to use the digital volume control on my Slim Devices Transporter which is sub-optimal and in some listening tests I’ve done has shown reduced dynamics and resolution and a slight increase in harshness/clinicality when compared to a good dedicated preamp. The EL15’s performance really surprised me especially given the handicap it had going in. For my preferences, it left the Musical Fidelity KW500 dead in the water. I’ve always been in the speakers first camp and this amp made me change some of my preconception in this arena. When I’ve previously compared electronics the difference between quality components has been subtle when compared to the differences between speakers (provided both amps are reasonably specced/capable to handle the speaker’s load). The EL15 however introduced changes nearly on par with upgrading speakers. I didn’t spend too much time with it so I can only do a brief run-down of how it compared to the Musical Fidelity KW500: Slight Increase in Resolution (say from a score of 9 out of 10 to a new score of 9.2) Medium Increase in transparency (from 8.5 to 9) Very significant increase in imaging and soundstaging (from 8 to 9) Significant increase in all aspects of bass from depth to control (from 8.5 to 9.2) Slight increase in speed (from 8.5 to 8.7) The starting scores above are borrowed from my CX4F review where I explain my 10 point rating system and rated both my new and old system. This review is available here if you are interested in further SGR related reading. The KW500 however was warmer and smoother (due to slightly blurred transients/attack) which you might like more but is a sound signature I’ve tired of and am moving away from. The EL15 is also incredibly revealing of any system faults thanks to its transparency. I love the sound of transparent equipment provided the rest of the audio chain is up to it. Unfortunately, the EL15 highlighted some distortion in the upper midrange of the Dynaudio C2’s that was still existent but better disguised when using the KW500.

Thanks for all of the comments and kind words gents! Danton, The speakers are in a large open plan living room. The room is roughly 8m * 8m * 3.5m. The room isn't as square as the raw dimensions would have you believe. It's got a lot of alcoves, walls, and variable ceiling heights that make the shape rather uneven with plenty of diffusion. The speakers are set up as follows (all measurements from the centre of drivers): In one corner of the room. The right speaker is 1.10m away from its side wall. The left speaker is 4.75m away from its side wall. The speakers are 1.2m away from the rear wall. The speakers are 2.15m apart. The distance from one speaker to the listening position is 2.75m. We did a little bit of position tweaking and found one that didn't need any tuning. Stuart was a bit disappointed because he put a lot of effort into designing the parametric EQ and wanted to use it. I on the other hand was stoked that my room was behaving well without need for bass EQ. I'll be sure to take some photos and add them to this thread in the near future. I have a few other chores I need to do first that I have been putting off until I could get this review out the door.

The thread has now been moved to the proper forum and posting is most welcome.

Looks stunning Waylander! I know it will sound even better than it looks too. I'm enjoying my CX4F's more and more each day and it's been over a month since I've had them. Enjoy rediscovering your music collection and good luck making it through 600 CD's! So much music, so little time!

My CX4F review is now live! Warning, it's pretty lengthy, so go grab yourself a cup of tea and settle down for a good read. Review available here.

Value – 9.5 The value here is impossible to describe without using superlatives. I still struggle to believe it myself and had I not listened to them myself I would have found it very difficult to have accepted anyone else’s word on it. The best way I can attempt to get this across to you is to illustrate by way of my own personal example. While auditioning for my previous system I was auditioning speakers themselves that cost more than twice the CX4F’s, this is before factoring in the additional costs related to powering these passive speakers. Put very simply, $8,480 worth of equipment replaced $28,000 RRP worth of equipment ($16,000 for the Dynaudio C2’s and $12,000 for the Musical Fidelity KW500). Performance-wise and for my preferences, I think the CX4F’s outperform the C2’s in almost every aspect. The only thing I miss about the C2’s is some mid-bass impact and their physical presence with their towering height. I’m still struggling to get my head around the fact that anyone would have put speakers this good on the market for this price. I happily paid the full $8,480 asking price and in all honesty I easily would have paid twice the asking price and would have still come on here and raved about the value. When I listed my old system for sale, my intention was to buy the much more expensive SGR MT3FSL’s as I didn’t expect that the CX4F’s (still on the drawing board at the time) would be anywhere near capable enough to meet my performance requirements at their intended price point. However, as I heard iteration after iteration of the CX3B prototypes and later the first prototype of the CX4F’s I had drastically realigned my beliefs about what performance was possible in this price point. Even though I had the money to afford the MT3FSL’s the performance was so close (slightly better in some areas and slightly worse in others) that I just couldn’t pass up the CX4F’s. I will be the first to admit that I don’t think many of the standard retail brands I auditioned in the past represented good value at their RRP’s. So much so that in the past, I have been a strong advocate of second hand purchases, of which both my Dynaudio C2’s and Musical Fidelity KW500’s were. It has therefore been a joy to find a new product that actually beats the value of a second hand system from a mainstream brand (assume a second hand value of $14,000 for my old speakers and amps combined using a very rough 50% of RRP calculation). If a used pair of CX4F’s cost $8,480 just for the product they would have still represented exemplary value. The fact that they are brand spanking new, I get full warranty, and that SGR has provided the best service I’ve ever experienced in any transaction I have ever engaged in is really just the icing on the cake. I will hopefully never have to sell these speakers (notice I wasn’t foolish enough to say never upgrading…) as even if I could get close to full retail for them on the second hand market, the value is so good I think I could still make easily make them work for their money’s worth in a second system. They are also good enough to really put off the idea of upgrading far out of my mind. Hopefully after I get my source and preamp sorted, this should be the end of my journey for at least the next 5 years as I get my career and hopefully a house sorted. Even with the C2 and KW500 example, I think the value claims are still pretty extreme and are therefore worth some further back-up by justifying how it’s actually possible to provide such value. In my mind I think the four following factors are largely responsible for this value: Excellence in design and optimisation extracting as much sound quality as possible from the given components. SGR’s refreshing business policy and ethics. The speakers are priced at a margin they need to operate their business and not at what the market can bear. However, to be honest, having seen how much time and effort Stuart has poured into the design of these speakers, I don’t know how he is ever going to recompensate himself for this time at their current prices. Especially given the costs of the large number of high quality components in each speaker. Direct to public sales model equals less margins in the chain and a lower cost to customers. I have also listened to products from a number of other direct to public manufacturers and while the value has always been much better than that offered from most of the standard international brands, I have yet to find anything that matches the value of SGR equipment. So I will put this down to the fourth and final factor: Leveraging economies of scale. The boxes are mass-produced in China to save cost (but don’t worry, they haven’t skimped on quality) and the rest of the assembly is aided by semi-automated machines (e.g. Wave Soldering and numerous CNC machines) in SGR’s new factory. Neutral - 9.5 I am a strong believer in choosing a system that sounds best to your ears. I would have no theoretical problem with purchasing a system that had purposefully introduced colourations if they provided a more enjoyable sound to my ears. However, after lengthy auditioning I have found myself time and again drawn to accurate and technically well-implemented speakers. To my ears they sound the most “musical” and pleasing across the broadest range of music. However, not all so-called “accurate” speakers have tickled my fancy. I have found many to be harsh and clinical and if my experiences were limited to those speakers I could understand why some people have the preconception that accurate speakers can’t be musical. I think this is due to some supposedly technically well implemented speakers hiding behind perfect measured performance in only one or two areas, like flat frequency response. However for a speaker to be truly well implemented there are many more aspects which need to be accounted for including power/off-axis response, resolution, distortion, transient response, time-alignment, dynamics, diffraction, etc… The CX4F’s are objectively neutral in the frequency response and they both sound and measure very evenly within my room. Furthermore, as you have read above, I think they really nail these other aspects as well lending them a sound I would describe as musical which leads on to my next topic... Musicality and Emotional Engagement – 9.5 Any speaker with an even frequency response and high resolution, such as the CX4F, is faced with a great challenge as any nastiness in driver behaviour will shine through very clearly. I think small amounts of undisguised distortion and cone-breakup often lead to what people call a clinical sound, which I am happy to say is not at all evident when listening to the CX4F’s. Furthermore, I personally find listening to the CX4F’s a very emotionally engaging experience and while I can’t guarantee everyone will, I think I’m a pretty tough benchmark. You may disagree and that’s ok. However, for those on the fence about these speakers and with negative preconceptions about accurate speakers in general, I highly recommend you challenge them by actually giving them a listen. I hope you will be pleasantly surprised and find them as musical as I do. For now, I must digress from the musicality of these speakers, as this is a topic that belongs to and has been done to death in the Great Debate forum. I consider myself a tough benchmark for emotional engagement because as you may have read on the past Movember thread on SNA, I am a recovering sufferer of depression. Now contrary to popular belief, depression can have very little to do with being sad or emotional (at least in my case). It instead depressed (i.e. supressed) my emotions all together making it difficult to feel happiness or even sadness. I’ve since made significant lifestyle changes and have mostly recovered but I can still always feel it creeping in behind my back and unfortunately my emotional system has never fully recovered. As such I still find it very difficult to get an emotional rise from anything. Music and Hi-Fi are so incredibly important to me because they are one of the few things that can still engage me emotionally, and even then, it can still be a great challenge. I’m happy to say that the CX4F’s perform beautifully in this aspect. The level of emotional engagement that the CX4F’s bring me accounts for much of the excitement about them that I have shared here. For me, my stereo is not just another trophy possession. It is an extremely integral part of my personal happiness and well-being. I therefore spend a disproportionate amount of my income on it. I should also add that working for this income is also responsible for a large part of the stress that impacts my depression. So my money is very hard-earned, and not easily parted with (see my comments on value above). The fact that I purchased the CX4F’s to fill such a critical need in my life should speak much louder than all of the words I have written here. I’ve never made any other purchase that has improved my quality of life this dramatically. I’m not saying that they will have as a profound impact on your life as they have on mine because the fact that I really love this hobby and that I listen to a lot of music share an equal role in my happiness regardless of the equipment used. Other Remarks: There are some other areas which I find nice to haves but are not as important in my buying decision but may be more important to some readers. They are as follows: Fit and Finish – 9.5 The quality of all of the individual components is indisputably of high quality. The wood finishes are matched to perfection and you can lose yourself starting into the depth of the gloss finish, especially with the rich wood textures underneath. The leather on the baffles is also seamlessly applied and looks very professional. The aesthetics of the speakers are more open to subjectivity and personal preference. I personally find the curves to be very elegant and love the imposing look of so many drivers. You may or may not like the looks, but both my partner and I think the CX4F’s are stunning. Low Level Listening - 9 Good low level listening is a nice to have for me but has never been a requirement because it only makes up a small portion of my listening time and I’m willing to sacrifice performance here for it to sound better in full swing. I’m fortunately enjoying the CX4F’s at all volume levels as they still perform solidly at low levels. However, now that I’ve got the best of both worlds, it might be hard to live without in the future and may become a requirement for future purchases. Rating of Old System For perspective, I’ll now give my old system (Dynaudio C2 + Musical Fidelity KW500 + Slim Devices Transporter used as a Transport and DAC only) a rough rating using the same scale and categories. Unfortunately I no longer have it here for comparison so it is done by memory and some leeway (say + or - 0.2) should be factored into the scores: ·Resolution – 9 Low Bass: 8.6. Mid and Upper Bass: 9.1. Midrange: 9.2. Highs: 9.1. [*]Separation – 9 [*]Speed – 8.5 Bass: 8. Mids: 8.8. Highs: 8.7 [*]Dynamics – 8.5 [*]Bass – 8.5 Tightness: 8.6. Tone, texture, detail: 8.3. Low bass impact: 8. Mid bass impact: 9.1. [*]Midrange – 8.8 (ignoring the distortion in the upper midrange which I’ve marked down the Listenability score for instead) Vocals: 8.8. Stringed Instruments: 8.8 [*]Highs – 9 [*]Coherency – 8.7 [*]Versatility – 9 [*]Soundstage and Imaging – 8 [*]Non-Fatiguing – 7 [*]Value – Average (no better or worse than other standard retail brands when new) [*]Neutrality – 8.5 [*]Musicality and Emotional Engagement – 8.5 [*]Fit and Finish – 8.5 [*]Low Level Listening - 8 Conclusion There are a few key points I’d really like to reiterate because they have been what’s stuck with me the most throughout this whole experience. Firstly, I think the CX4F’s are outstanding speakers and represent sensational value. When talking to Stuart about his design approach, he speaks heavily of “optimisation”. I really understand what he means by this term now after having spent some serious time with the speakers. Maximum performance gains have been provided with excellent sound quality across many facets of reproduction and this has been done with surprisingly little sacrifices in return. Furthermore, the CX4F’s are superb chameleon speakers and have the ability to cater to a wide range of tastes. On a personal and more important level to me than the objective performance of the speakers is the enjoyment I’ve been able to extract from them. I’ve easily been averaging ten hours of use a day of over the past three weeks thanks to some time off from work and the ability to work from home. They’ve radically refreshed my music collection and renewed my interest in music. Every time I think I know what they are capable of they surprise me again when I play an old favourite or find a new incredible piece of music for the first time. Not only am I listening to more music, but I’ve also noticed a change in my listening habits. I’m listening a lot more to whole albums without jumping around and picking favourite songs, which is surprising because there is still so much music I am yearning to listen to on them. Even more surprising has been the way that I am finding new favourite songs on old favourite albums. Including albums which I thought I knew well and was previously getting tired of. My only real complaint now is that even when listening to ten or more hours of music a day, I still don’t have enough time to listen to all of the music I want to…. It’s a tough life :mad: s Finally, I have quite a bit more to say but this review is already very long in the teeth. Hopefully I have time to talk a bit more about the following in a future post: The overall SGR experience and level of service. This has been nothing short of extraordinary and is easily worth an entire post just to detail how well I’ve been treated. Some details about the physical aspects of the design that have led to the performance I’ve described. I really enjoy learning about the design aspect of speakers and I’ve talked in great length with Stuart about this topic and would love to share some of that information with the community. If you've made it this far, you probably deserve a medal. Thanks for reading!

Preferences for individual parts of the frequency range: The following ratings are the most subject to personal preference. For the other more objective aspects (e.g. resolution or dynamics) I think it would be possible for two speakers to be similarly ranked across multiple listeners in a direct comparison. However, the following are all based almost entirely on my personal preferences. Bass – 9.2 Bass tightness and control – 9.3 Bass tone, texture, and detail – 9.3 Low-bass impact – 9.3 Mid-bass impact – 8.7 Neutral - 9.0 when tweaked with the adjustable dials Bass seems to be a tricky beast for all speaker designs to master. The bass on the CX4F is also very special and unique in my Hi-Fi experience so I think it’s worth a little bit extra attention. Firstly it’s hard to believe the bass depth you’re hearing is coming from such a moderately sized speaker (especially relative to some of the monster sized speakers out there). When I’ve played the CX4F’s for guests, I’ve had a number of them ask where the subwoofer was located and always enjoy seeing the shock on their faces when I tell them I don’t have one. I’m hearing a lot of new low bass content, even compared to my Dynaudio C2’s which were rated to be -3dB at 28Hz. I know Stuart rates his equipment very conservatively and that the CX4F’s also have a much shallower roll-off due to being sealed which probably accounts for this large difference. The CX4F’s bass is very clean, tight, and fast thanks to the transient response, sealed cabinet construction, and the critical damping of the cabinet. While I am objectively hearing more bass, subjectively sometimes I think I am feeling it less. Some tracks don’t have impact in the places I’m used to it and others have way more impact than I am used to. I think I’ve finally pinned down what I am experiencing. When there is low bass (<30Hz) present I am feeling more bass in the form of room pressurisation thanks to what I assume is more low bass output (which I’d love to confirm with some measuring gear sometimes). This bass is felt by the entire body. However, when there is only mid-bass content, the usual impact/slam (the kind you feel in your chest) i*s different than what I’m used to. It’s still there and it’s still strong but it passes much quicker than any other system I’ve listened to. Some systems pin you down with chest slam, whereas the CX4F’s instead hit quick and then release you as the hit passes through you almost instantly before dissipating**. I would put this down to the incredible cleanliness of the CX4F’s bass in the time domain. The drivers settle really quickly so there is no overhang and additionally there is very little added cabinet resonance. So only the impact from the initial transient is delivered without augmentation from additional driver and cabinet resonance. So there is a trade-off present for absolute chest-slam in favour of clean bass with excellent speed, dynamics, tightness, and tone. This is probably the single biggest trade-off in the system to my mind and might be the one that takes the most to adjust to. However, it’s a trade-off I'm more than happy with and I listen to 40% electronic music. The mid-bass slam is the only single aspect I like about my C2’s, even if I rate the overall bass package of the CX4F’s better. Overall, I’m actually getting more bass and I’m really enjoying the low bass impact and the other finer qualities of the mid-bass. As an example one of my go to reference tracks has been Ott’s Queen of All Everything off of the album Skylon. This track has an amazing build to an awesome bass line midway through the song. When this bass first comes in the impact is a little weaker than I’m used to. However, moving on to the next track on the album, Rogue Bagel, there is now substantially more bass impact than I am used to. The overall quality and presentation of the bass is preferable on both tracks on the CX4F’s even though I miss some of the impact on Queen of All Everything. The mid-bass also does something I’ve not experienced from any other speaker. Even though the impact isn’t as heavy, it is so intense that it actually gets my heart rate elevated with the right kinds of music. This could potentially be the realistic transients and dynamics triggering fight or flight responses in the brain. Sounds a bit like ****, but whatever it is, it’s very enjoyable. NB: After writing the above, I did some further research into my old speakers. While I couldn’t find any exact measurements of the C2’s, Stereophile does have measurements for the C4’s which showed a 5db peak in the mid to upper bass. So I messed around with the mid-bass driver level adjustment dial on the back as well as using the parametric EQ settings to simulate this hump. This made some fairly significant inroads into improving the quantity of the chest thump. The quality (e.g. the speedy dissipation of the thump) still remained the same though. With tweaking I would revise the score to 9.0 (for reference I would rate the C2’s as still slightly edging them out for chest thump with a score of 9.1). My ideal 9.5-10 bass would have the excellent quality of bass that the CX4F’s do with a stronger/longer mid-bass impact. However, I don’t think this is physically possible to achieve both of these goals simultaneously and I’d choose the trade-off the CX4F’s have implemented any day of the week. Midrange – 9.1 Vocals – 9 Stringed instruments – 9.2 The CX4F’s vocals are superb and the best I’ve heard on any solid state system. I feel like I am selling them too short by rating them at a 9. However, I do remember hearing what I thought I were more enchanting vocals on some tube systems but this was very early in my audio journeys (at which point I had no reference, was easily impressed, and of course subject to the faultiness of audio memory in general). I have more recently heard some tubed systems that I’ve found to be so overly syrupy and sweet that they were distracting (and I wonder if now as my experience in audio has increased whether I would find the same of the past tubed systems I’ve listened to). The CX4F vocals are very clear and detailed. The low level resolution and decay gives the singer’s a naturally “breathy” voice. The presence of vocalists is also excellent thanks to the imaging and soundstaging. Especially exciting to me is the way multiple vocalists are separated and distinct within the soundstage floating hauntingly in space. Other instruments are easily the winner in the midrange. While I find some vocal enhancing systems often sacrifice the portrayal of these instruments by making them sound sluggish, this is certainly not the case here. Plucked and strummed string instruments are my personal favourite and acoustic guitar is produced very accurately. The sound is blistering fast, twangy, and full of detailed and clear harmonic content. Some standouts on stringed instruments have been anything by Rodrigo Y Gabriela and a cover of While My Guitar Gently Weeps by Jake Shimabukuro performed on a ukulele. Both are recommended no matter what system you have for some fun and speedy acoustic music. I’ve also only recently been getting into Angus and Julia Stone and both the guitars and the vocals are really doing it for me on the new system. Highs – 9.2 The CX4F’s manage the very difficult balance between providing detailed highs with excellent resolution while still being easy to listen to and free from fatigue. I don’t feel like I’m missing out on any extension or detail and I still feel the listenability is top-notch. While excellent, the tweeter is just short of the best highs I’ve heard. I would give that credit to some (but not all) implementation of the Scan-Speak Revelator tweeter. Overall, I find the Revelator to be a technically better tweeter, but it is less forgiving than the CX4F tweeter on poorly recorded and mastered material. I rate the CX4F’s highs over implementations of both the acclaimed Dynaudio Esotar2 tweeter and the B&W Diamond tweeter (rated 3rd and 4th respectively) that I’ve heard. Coherency – 9.3 I don’t like presentations where a particular portion of the frequency spectrum is emphasised or stands out. Even if it is because this one particular portion is better, I still find that it makes the other portions of the frequency spectrum sound that much worse in comparison. Fortunately, the CX4F’s have been designed in such a way that the different parts of the frequency spectrum are all of equal quality and similar in character. They all have consistently excellent speed, resolution, dynamics, and clarity. The further effort that has then been put into the crossover design is readily apparent as the drivers are all stitched together into one seamless whole. I can’t tell where one driver stops and the next begin without getting close enough to put my ears to the drivers. Versatility – 9.5 I could further qualify my listening patterns into the following broad genre mix: 40% electronic (IDM, Ambient, Psytrance, Tehcno, etc…), 30% acoustic (folk, singer/songwriter), 20% Rock (mostly indie), 10% Other (including Orchestral, Soundtracks, and other oddities). Due to the CX4F’s incredibly balanced and neutral nature I find the CX4F’s to be equally enjoyable across this large mix of varied program materials. Many of the speakers I’ve auditioned have been voiced for particular types of music with which they handle well but have fallen apart with other types of music. Furthermore, I like the CX4F’s voicing (or lack thereof), and to my ears and my preference, I think they sound better in all of the genres that I listen to, even when compared to speakers voiced specifically for that genre. I can appreciate that others might enjoy certain colourations that make certain types of music more enjoyable, but I personally prefer a neutral and balanced presentation of all of the genres I listen to. Furthermore, because the speakers are so transparent, they easily bring out any differences in the equipment you put in front of them. This would be very useful and beneficial if you want to add a different flavour to your sound. Admittedly the CX4F’s speed and resolution may make them sound relatively lean if your reference is a full tube system. By lean I’m referring to the thickness/fatness of notes and not the bass. Furthermore, I wouldn’t describe the CX4F’s as lean in the overall big scheme of things, only relative to some types of systems. Fortunately, there is still plenty of room in both the preamp and DAC output stage for tubes if you want more richness and body to the sound. If someone is planning on doing so, please let me know and I’d love to come over for a listen! Additionally, the adjustable dials on the back allow you to tailor the frequency response of your system if you want some added warmth (boosted mid-bass) or more prominent/forward vocals (boosted mids), etc… So you can further change flavours without having to change equipment if you are so inclined. Last but not least, the CX4F’s are also versatile in relation to the rooms they will perform well in with a plethora of level and bass management options including: -3dB to +3dB adjustments for each driver as well as parametric bass EQ. Fortunately for me and unfortunately for you I don’t have any experiences with the effectiveness of these tools in tackling room issues to share with you as my current placement gives a very even bass response. However, as way of example, all who have heard handysteel’s system have said that the CX3B’s perform admirably in a very small room thanks to the bass-shelf filter and the ability to tone down the highs. On the opposite side of the spectrum, I’ve also heard both the CX3B and CX4F easily fill the very large listening room at the SGR headquarters. I’ve of course frequently heard the CX4F’s effortlessly fill my large open plan living room at home as well. Soundstage and Imaging – 9 This aspect is again more subject to personal bias and people may fall in the exaggerated and diffuse sound field camp or the pinpoint and precise imaging camp (I belong to the latter). The soundstage is nearly on par with that from the best rigs I’ve heard. One caveat: the soundstaging is as to be expected very dependent on placement. I’m still working on finding the right balance in my system. As I pulled them further apart and further off the back wall I had the soundstaging increase to what I would rate as a 9. However, I lost the bass smoothness in this node as it changed which bass nodes were being activated. I’ve since moved the speakers back a bit closer to the back wall and have achieved a better bass response in room but at a loss of soundstage depth and width. I would rate the soundstage in my current position as an 8. But I know with a little more positioning trial and error and maybe a little help from the bass management options, I can find a place that offers a smooth bass response and a better soundstage. The soundstage emanates from well beyond the sides of the speakers and has excellent depth (if they are pulled out far enough in the room). The imaging within this soundstage is very precise. Instruments and voice float in a pinpoint and very clearly defined space in front of you. The soundstage and imaging capabilities are maintained at all volume levels from very low to very high. With electrostatics and other dipoles, you can get a slightly larger soundstage but the imaging tends to be more diffuse, exaggerating the size of the singers and instruments. Some people prefer this because of the enlarged “presence”. I personally prefer the pinpoint imaging because when a voice occupies a more realistic and defined space it enhances my feeling of the singer being in the room with me, so I am happy to stick with these particular box speakers in this regard. Non-Fatiguing – 9 To me this single aspect is tied for equal importance in system selection with musical engagement (which is determined by a combination of all of the other traits listed in this review). In fact, poor relative performance in this area was the reason I sold my old system. The tweeters on the Dynaudio C2’s were being run outside of their comfort range leading to slight distortion in the upper midrange. While the first-order crossovers and only being a two-way most likely contributed to some of the attributes I liked about the Dynaudio C2’s sound (e.g. coherency and transparency) it unfortunately let this distortion through. I have very sensitive ears and I’ve become more and more susceptible to this distortion and it has caused my ears increasing levels of fatigue as time has progressed. I do however appreciate that everyone’s ear are different and not everyone finds a little of this distortion displeasing, in fact some might find it enjoyable and I have often heard it spoken of as a positive attribute of a speaker and usually described as “energy”. For the record I also find higher volume levels (anything above 90 dB) painful and uncomfortable no matter how clean the system and recording and I’m sure many of you listen to this as your comfortable/normal level. The CX4F’s on the other hand are an excellent example of the advantages of active crossover. Not only do the CX4F’s retain (and even out perform!) the magic transparency and coherence of the C2’s (which are what many purists would consider an ideal system again thanks to being a simple two-way with first order crossovers) but they also restrict each driver’s operating range to drastically reduce distortion leading to a much less fatiguing and smoother sound. In my previous system I experimented a bit with valves in some of the equipment I auditioned. The KW500 integrated amp I settled on even had some tubes in the preamp stage. I also auditioned a few CDPs and DACs with tube output stages as well. This helped a little in disguising the problem but in the end was just a band-aid solution. Thankfully, with the CX4F’s I now have a very solid foundation to build on. Future upgrades can now entirely be targeted at genuine improvements in sound (or to tailor a particular flavour of sound if you are so inclined) instead of as a band-aid to try and cover up a fault. I cannot emphasise enough how pleased I am of this fact. I’m no longer chasing my tail. The listenability of the speakers ended up being even better than I was expecting. In my auditioning I had proved to myself that they were utterly non-fatiguing for well recorded material (I would score them a 9.5 if this was the only type of music I would be listening to on them) but I had only listened to a few poorly mastered tracks on them during my auditions, which they seemed to handle reasonably well. I wanted to test this out more so once I got them home I chucked on a few more poorly mastered and compressed albums, and for such a high resolution system, this poorly mastered material was surprisingly listenable. On my old system such recordings used to sound genuinely bad. Now they sound acceptable. Most of the time I will still listen to the well-recorded material because it is a better listening experience overall, however, I have a lot of lo-fi music that has absolutely brilliant musical content that I am really enjoying ripping out on the new speakers. The CX4F’s have done the best of any high resolution system I’ve heard at handling both well recorded and poorly mastered material. The only way to conceivably score higher on the listenability would be to drop to a lower resolution system and smooth over the nastiness in recordings with some of the more mushy valve designs available (not that all valves are mushy), but this would be at the expense of some of the other aspects/scores and would reduce my personal engagement to the music.