Sonus Faber "lushness" and "beauty" - what is/was it?

[metaphacts]

Originally Posted by ronenash

The Amati Anniversario came after the Stead on which it is based and I am sure it was designed by Franco. It might have been released after Franco left SF.

AA is from Franco's long time apprentice and current Sonus faber designer Paolo Tezzon and while Franco was still there. While the drivers are based on, though not the same as Strad, the enclosure is updated from Amati Homage. AA is a continuation of the narrow baffle lute shape as opposed to the Strad's violin shape.

[Glisse]

I have SF from the early days, the middle, and latest production. Whilst I agree with the generalisation that SF have become less romantic/warm and more accurate/sterile (to use pro/con descriptions) over time, there is substantial variation amongst specific models.

I think in the early days, Franco designed cabinets that would add to the final sound, so you were hearing drivers and complex harmonics from the wood of the cabinet. Cabinets have become progressively more inert, and designed to maximise performance from the drivers rather than "interfere" with them.

I also had the impression that Franco used to sit in a normal listening room with a box of parts when he was voicing the crossover. And do it entirely by ear. Now, we have computers/microphones/software, etc.

Perhaps it was these two approaches that created the warmth with detail?

I guess it is a bit like art, we might like a painter in general, but will really connect to some specific pieces. I really liked the Electa Amator, but not version II of the same speaker, by example.

What I could not agree with is any suggestion that Franco=Romantic and Paolo=Accurate. Franco's last designs were the Ktêma and the Accordo, and do not sound as "lush" as either the Amati Futura or Guarneri Evolution.

[Apexorca]

Originally Posted by Glisse

What I could not agree with is any suggestion that Franco=Romantic and Paolo=Accurate. Franco's last designs were the Ktêma and the Accordo, and do not sound as "lush" as either the Amati Futura or Guarneri Evolution.

This is of course a matter of taste. I think the new speakers still have the warmth and romantic sound, but more refined. Accuracy is much better in Futura than it is in Anniversario.
So they have emerged these two worlds in one speaker.

[Glisse]

Originally Posted by Apexorca

This is of course a matter of taste. I think the new speakers still have the warmth and romantic sound, but more refined. Accuracy is much better in Futura than it is in Anniversario.
So they have emerged these two worlds in one speaker.

I agree with all 4 of these statements

[larevoj]

Originally Posted by Glisse

What I could not agree with is any suggestion that Franco=Romantic and Paolo=Accurate. Franco's last designs were the Ktêma and the Accordo, and do not sound as "lush" as either the Amati Futura or Guarneri Evolution.

I have to agree on this.

The latest speakers from SF and FS has literally merged in their sound signature. They are all great speakers and I personally like the Ktêma very much but I would not describe it as "lush" so is the Accordo - in fact far from it. If you place the Accordo and GE in the same room and A/B them you would be pleasantly surprised. IMHO the Accordo is much more transparent and neutral versus GE...while GE is on the warmer side of neutral but excel in other areas. They both sound fabulous but there are many tangible/intangible factors affecting one's buying decision...yes we all have different tastes

[Glisse]

Originally Posted by larevoj

...IMHO the Accordo is much more transparent and neutral versus GE...while GE is on the warmer side of neutral but excel in other areas. They both sound fabulous but there are many tangible/intangible factors affecting one's buying decision...yes we all have different tastes

Excellent post. The challenge is to try and hear all these wonderful speakers in our own listening space with our own equipment, because only then can we determine which of the tangible/intangible factors, as you mention, will be best for us. And this is quite a challenge!

The Accordo for me is quite interesting on a number of levels. Firstly, because I think Franco's first love was always for monitor style speakers. And because he seemed to have been pursuing, right to the end, greater purity and transparency in the mid band. And to do this, to get to this level of purity, he has removed any added weight coming from the upper bass/lower mid range area, which was a function in many of the earlier "romantic/emotional" models. And which still exists, as you noted, with the GE. Although not sufficiently for some in this thread, it seems. And I say that confessing my own love for the original Electa Amator

Clearly, the Accordo seems to be very demanding on how it is set up, the size of the room it is used in, and what amplifier it is used with. I have not been able to hear this in my own room

The GE is probably a more universal choice for most rooms, amplifiers, range of music types, etc. But it is also, in Europe at least, twice the price of the Accordo. And the Accordo is not very much more than Cremona Auditor M.

[larevoj]

Originally Posted by Glisse

Excellent post. The challenge is to try and hear all these wonderful speakers in our own listening space with our own equipment, because only then can we determine which of the tangible/intangible factors, as you mention, will be best for us. And this is quite a challenge!

Hi Glisse, that was the challenge I had too. I didn't only had the chance to audition GE when it first launched and had to fly into Hong Kong only to see the static display of Accordo before I decide. Only months down the road after I purchased the GE that I had the chance to audition both Accordo and GE together. Though these two speakers have intertwined legacies but they sound absolutely different even with identical electronics. It would be very interesting to hear it in the comfort of your own house...the only way is to buy it and I doubt you will go wrong with either!

Originally Posted by Glisse

The Accordo for me is quite interesting on a number of levels. Firstly, because I think Franco's first love was always for monitor style speakers. And because he seemed to have been pursuing, right to the end, greater purity and transparency in the mid band. And to do this, to get to this level of purity, he has removed any added weight coming from the upper bass/lower mid range area, which was a function in many of the earlier "romantic/emotional" models. And which still exists, as you noted, with the GE. Although not sufficiently for some in this thread, it seems. And I say that confessing my own love for the original Electa Amator

Clearly, the Accordo seems to be very demanding on how it is set up, the size of the room it is used in, and what amplifier it is used with. I have not been able to hear this in my own room

Lately I have been auditioning ARC Ref CD9 in my system and among all the positive characteristics is the added weight in the midband - its resolution in the entire band is simply magnificent. On vocals it delivers a full bodied tone, in bass instruments it provides a greater sense in tempo/beats and its certainly fast for a tube transport/DAC - I was comparing against Bryston and Wadia DAC/transport. I too find its critical to get the midband right as its the soul of the music and to strike a right balance is not easy.

[Glisse]

Originally Posted by larevoj

Hi Glisse, that was the challenge I had too. I didn't only had the chance to audition GE when it first launched and had to fly into Hong Kong only to see the static display of Accordo before I decide. Only months down the road after I purchased the GE that I had the chance to audition both Accordo and GE together. Though these two speakers have intertwined legacies but they sound absolutely different even with identical electronics. It would be very interesting to hear it in the comfort of your own house...the only way is to buy it and I doubt you will go wrong with either! ...

Not many have had the chance to compare the two directly, as you have

And as you said, they are very different. So the room setup and equipment will always have to suit one more than the other.

I am still trying to see if I can get an Accordo into my room without buying it first. As I already have Amati Futura, I know how much I will like the GE.

I already have the main electronics for this system, a Burmester 082 and a BADA DAC2. More than enough for the Accordo, and probably ok for the GE at the levels I would use, and the room is only 24m².

Funnily enough, Wojech Pacula, in his rather strange review of the Accordo, thought it would sound good with an 082. But then, he only listened to the Accordo with (according to Franco's reply to him) exactly the wrong amps for the rather special mid/bass driver in the Accordo. A high output impedance low power valve amp, then a very high power and somewhat sterile (to me) SS amp

And to return to the thread topic, Mr. Pacula and his friends in Krakow much preferred the "romantic" era SF, specifically the Electa Amator and Guarneri Homage, over Franco's latest vision - influenced of course by using the wrong amp.

But what is most interesting with this tale is that later on this same group then compared their beloved EA and GH to the GE. I think they had all expected to find the GE more sterile than their old legends. But in fact it was the GE that sounded fuller, richer, and more complete when used in the same room on the same equipment and directly compared.

So for those that think the AF and GE have lost the old SF magic, perhaps they need to hear these in their own systems?

[BillK]

All I can say is that my dealer used largely the same setup for their AF and their AA, and the AA just seemed to have a bit more of the SF "magic" I've come to expect from them while the AF just kind of seemed like a good speaker.

Amps tried were the MC452 and a Moon W-8.

[microstrip]

I have listened repeatedly and regularly to the Amati Anniversary and have had the Amati Futura in my system for a few weeks. IMHO there is no possible contest - the gap is very wide. The tonal balance of the two speakers is very different - the Futura response seems more tilted down, but incredibly shows more air, much faster transients and much better bass response. Its soundstage manages to wrap around the speakers and out of the room boundaries in a way the former SF speakers could not. As I often say, coupled to an Audio Research REF150 with the help of the REF40 it sounded much better than it should. It could show the fantastic bass articulation and tonality of the REF150 - yes, the tubed REF150 can show intonation and detail in the low bass that many SS designs can not - most only deliver slam and dynamics in this zone of the spectrum.

IMHO, the difference is not having more or less SF "magic" - the Futura is a more advanced and better speaker, a successful evolution of the great Anniversario design.

BTW, I also prefer the SF Amator with the Esotar tweeter to the Amator II.