speakers up to £1,000

I meant it in the most literal sense. The SCM12's sounded as if the music had been slowed down. And not just with the Alpha 9 and ATC integrated. The SCM12's displayed the same trait with a Roksan Caspian CD and MF A308 integrated. It was yawnsville I'm afraid.

 

Fastcat,

Given your room dimensions and what you're looking for from your speakers, there can be only one choice.

Second hand Quad ESL-63s.

I've banged on about Quad ESLs enough to bore the forum to tears so I won't repeat any of it here. Just do a search for 'Quad' which should also throw up comments from people at the most recent gathering where Paul's ESL-63s received favourable comment (much of it from those who'd previously put them down as a bit pipe and slippers :Quad: ).

reg

 

Chris - how do you rate your Castles on their own, without your sub to help out the low end? I could be in the market myself for speakers in this sort of price range in a month or so...

 

Their -3dB point is at 45 Hz so not very low really although this is well into room resonance territory and thus suffices in practice.

The carbon fibre drivers give impressive thwack. The first time you hear rock drums through these beauties you will have a huge grin on your face. The midrange is clean and open as is the top end. The lower registers tend towards a seductive warmth that draws you in, yet the speaker is good at detail - without sounding cold or analytical. The treble is slightly lowered and slightly rolled off compared to some of the competition but for me this is a good thing. It keeps digitalitis at bay (not that there's much of that from the Alpha 9). This is a speaker that allows you to immerse yourself in the music for hours on end without fatigue.

They will go impressively loud when required but they sound good when played quietly too.

I have my REL sub set to 28 Hz. It really only does the very low stuff that no domestically acceptable floorstander will do well.

The sub also helps out the midrange on appropriate material. I'm assuming that this is because it recreates a more believable impression of the acoustic space in which a recording was made. Not that the Castles need much help. Their midrange is very clean and open with a deep stage where this is present in the recording.

I am very happy with the sub. It provides a full range performance to the system without overpowering the room resonances. A larger deeper floorstander would not do this.

 

Cheers Chris. I was impressed with the Castle's when I heard them at last years Bristol show, but it's interesting to hear your comments now you've lived with the speakers for a good while.

 

I had a choice between 783s and Quad 21Ls at £500 and £570 respectively in a demo recently - there was absolutely no competition, the Quads trounced the Missions in every respect except (perhaps) absolute bass extension. The 21Ls are so much tighter and more detailed in the bottom end that you could argue there's more usable bass with the 21Ls anyway. To be honest, while speakers depend very much on personal preference, I'd be extremely surprised if anyone went for the Missions having heard the Quads - the Missions just sound really cheap and nasty by comparison.

I actually ended up buying the 22Ls, but that's another story

 

The 783 was a bit of a mixed bag. The 782 was better balanced.

 

The Ruark Prelude IIs are easy to drive and on the warmer side, might work well with the Arcam. Should be c.£900.

I'd also suggest trying to hear the Leema Xyps - fairly large standmounters with deeper bass than the Xens, which you might find a little bass light on their own. These would give you a much more detailed sound, and would be closer to my taste. I believe the Xyps can be had for c.£800.

 

Hi there FastCat, I've heard Mission speakers on Arcam kit and IMO they weren't a particularly good mix. The Mission's in question were the large 772 standmounters and were partnered with an Arcam 9 CDP and Arcam 9 integrated amp.

I demo'd these agaist a pair of B&W 602s1's and they completely destroyed the Missions in every department apart from aesthetics .
The demo room was quite large (but acoustically very good) and I suspect that this was a contributing factor. Basically, the Missions just didn't have the energy to fill a larger room.

[The dealer actually told me that the majority of Mission speakers are designed to be used in smaller UK sized rooms and just don't complement the size/room type of most European homes.]

So, as no surprise to a few regulars here I'd recommend a good s/h pair of B&W's . The older B&W models [IMO] are voiced in a less analytical way than most of the current crop and this may suit your musical tastes more than the newer crop.

For under £1,000 there is a plethora of good models out there that will better your current Missions.

On this site there's a pair of B&W CDM1's :

B&W CDM1NT black ash with B&W stands. Ecosse speaker cable included. As new and boxed. for £475.

Add to this an Arcam P75 power amp :

ARCAM DIVA- P75 POWER AMP (Mint) for £185 and you'll have a very accomplished system with additional drive, detail and timing, with a some money left over for plenty of CD's (and a pressie for the wife ).

If you don't feel the need for an additional power amp then why not try and source out some CDM7SE's or CDM7NT's (which have just been superceded).

With the s/h market the way it is at the moment, I think you'd be mad to buy new.

Cheers,

Steve

 

Re: Re: speakers up to £1,000

Fair comment. The 772 was neither one thing nor the other. It didn't get close to the 773e (which was very good with an Alpha 9 and Alpha 8R/8P combo), but didn't have the subtlety of the 771.

Yes, but the 602s1 had other problems - too much treble and flabby wallowy bass - as did the 601s2.

In every speaker makers range, it seems there are gems and there are dogs. The Mission 773e was a gem. The 771 was also good. The 772 and 774 were not nearly so good.

The same is true of the current Castle range. The Conway 3 is a gem. Some of the smaller models are a bit hit and miss and need careful partnering.

The CDM1NT was a nice speaker but again careful partnering is needed. This is a very smooth speaker which can sound a little unexciting with the wrong kit. But great with the right kit.

 

Thanks Steve and the others for the very helpful suggestions.

I'm definitely coming round to the idea of second hand kit ..... there seem to be some real bargains out there as many of you have pointed out ..... some change left over for a pressie for SHMBO is a smart move, especially with Feb 14th round the corner ! Plus a P75 (which has been on the upgrade list for a while) for £175 - I'm tempted to look into that irrespective of new speakers .....

So thanks again - I've got plenty of new ideas to research which is great.

 

A85 amp and cd73 CD player...

looking for speakers that offer clarity of treble / mid range, tight bass...


Best get rid of the arcam kit then...oh... and those (awful) Mission speakers...... and most importantly, stop reading What HiFi, otherwise you will continue to buy crap hifi. Why not try a fresh approach? Find a dealer who will give you the time to find a system that you actually like --- novel idea? try it..you never know.

 

Thats the best bit of advice I have seen on these forums for ages!

 

Mission 782's epitomise everything I haven't liked about Mission speakers over the last 15 years. I half suspect they invented them just to annoy me. And the way the top end is tuned / biassed to make up for any actual leading edge definition in the bass, in particular, precludes them from being a hi-fi speaker at all IMHO.

Mission 734's are at least a bit more honest, but there's much better about, but they did sell remarkably cheaply (less than half price) for a while, which allowed many people a speaker with decent scale which otherwise they may not have been able to afford, so I won't be too nasty about them. There are some happy 782 owners as well, there's a couple on here and I also know one other, so there must be some merit in them.

Best Mission speakers by miles that I've heard (IMHO of course) were the 752 freedom, 751 freedom and original 752 in that order (+ 753's to taste). Nothing else would get house room here.

The A85 is a decent amp. It can be a little lean compared with some of the competition, and it's power amp section is better than the pre, but there's nothing wrong with it.

Cheers

 

Yup, 752F's rock. Didnt go much on anything ide heard from mission till I heard em, really quick not over bassy and vocals to die for, Iveseem em used for 350 which has to be a bargain. not too bassy super quick and really really clear. Chris

 

I'd agree with all of that.
Nothing wrong with the A85 at all really. Second hand 751/752/753/ 628 tannoys, ruark talisman II, Linn Keliegh ... all would be a good match... all available sub 400 second hand too!

Guess what I was trying to say is new speakers at 1,000 isnt how I would spend the budget... instead 350 on second hand speakers like the above, and if the rest was burning a hole in my pocket, 650 on a second hand amp would be my choice.. the A85 is decent, but would struggle (like any similarly priced amp would) when compared to a 2,000 amp bought second hand for around 700...

 

My ProAc Studio125s are excellent in my 15ft x 12ft room. Definitely support earlier suggestion that you add the P85 - big difference, and arrival of marginally different A90/P90 means that A85/P85 are likely to be illogically cheap - whilst available.

I'm going to run my Arcam kit for a long while yet - "budget" or not! With cables, isolation, amdn mains filtration etc I must be looking at (and listening to) £6000 of kit, and if this is budget then I'm gobsmacked but at least there's less chance of me being up against the wall come the revolution....

No, no, don't shoot comrade, there's a guy round the corner with Krell/Naim/.... and Nordost power cables!

Good luck.