Shahinian and other speak suggestions from SL2 for 500 system

I would find it very difficult to replace my SL2s. If I absolutely had to do so, Arcs would be highest on my list. They do have an extra octave in bass, a great sense of scale courtesy the omni-approach, and they're still a lot of fun. That said, SL2s have slam which even the Arcs can't match.

I disagree with many that they need to be far from the wall. I don't find that to be the case, but I guess it does depend on the room. But again, they're easy enough to move into place for critical listening, not being spiked etc.

Obelisks appear to be more room-dependent than Arcs. We've been playing about with them quite a bit and they need quite a different location and more space.

Somebody mentioned Dynavector amps. I believe there may be something new on the way from Dynavector sometime soon, but it would have to be spectacular value for money to be in the 552/500 ballpark. OTOH, if you want something different then there are so many brands out there.

I agree with Gary that stepping down to a 272 based system would be a huge step backward. You'd be better off looking for a different presentation. With the 272 solution you'd just be looking at a worse solution and would miss what you had. At least with 'different', it's a new and different way of appreciating music. The question is finding a way you still enjoy, and that can be difficult.

Regards,
Frank.
All opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinion of any organisations I work for, except where this is stated explicitly.

The Neat' might be an option if their bass doesn't suffer from the usual slowed/detail loss characteristics of so many of the Isobarik and ported enclosures I have heard over the years, including Linns and Kudos.

I didn't find the Neats slow and lost detail in the bass department, in fact the Neat Ultimatums had one of the best bass lines out of all the speakers I had here. If you want fast detailed bass then the Eben X4's I also had here, had that in abundance. They were a little quirky as Peter will confirmand they took a bit to get them working properly but once they started signing they had real bass slam. Again they had a small footfall and could work in small places.

Regards

PB

I feel like seconding this. I have heard them on a couple of occasions with time and relax, and I was very much impressed. I normally have mixed feelings about Wilsons, but these sounded different to my ears, more analytical and less mammoth. On second thought I also found them to have perhaps a little too much of everything, but are the only Wilsons I'd buy if I had the money and would want Wilsons.

P.S. I have also heard them with CDX2, XPS-DR, 282/HC-DR, 250. Not a smooth, relaxing system for background listening but something that is not easily forgotten.

Michael

PB and I both enjoy ART speakers, though our models are a little different.  Not all ART speakers are quite as large as PB's!  It might be worth a call to Derek Dunlop at ART to see what he might recommend and perhaps let you try.

We also have NBLs in the family on the end of an all Naim system.  They are positioned very close to a back wall, and deliver the goods (so to speak).

Oh, and a number of us were fortunate enough to hear the new NAP300DR at the Signals Show.  It's really quite an advance on the NAP300, itself no slouch.  There's enough grunt and proper control to wake up most speaker cones in the morning. 

Hope this helps, FT

Mike - we now have the new 272/250DR/SL2 system up and running. If you want a listen, you know where we are. Initial impressions, without the speakers being 100% set up, is that it's going to to be extraordinarily good.

Wilson speakers work well with Naim but *grown up* SL2, they ain't. They produce all together very different soundscape from any Naim speakers. 

Also not sure they'd add that much in scale, also having an 8" bass unit, albeit ported (which I often tend not to like).

Many thanks! Hoping to set up an audition when I return, though will have to consult on height at home.....

Dear Mike,
I have very similar system to yours (but with CDS3/XPS2), and last week I had a home demo of Kodos Titans 88 vs Magico S3. Very soon I decided that Kudos are not good choice for me.

Very often I preferred SL2 over them ....

Kudos were to bright and not so clear in my system.
So I started to listen to Magico and unfortunately now I am in "love with them".
They show me what 500 series really can,
Sound from Magicos was very neutral and analytical but with lot of musicality.
They have little darker character but at the same time they are very, very fast.
They gave a lot of new information from CD's so listen to them is a great pleasure.
I noticed that Magicos maybe are not so emotional like some times SL2 are but they gave a lot 3D effects, perfect controlled bass and very clear sound ....
My system never sounds so good like with Magicos .....
I recommend you to check them at your system.

Regards,

Piotr

Thanks, Piotr, that very useful, especially in the light of Jon Honeyball's comments about the range.

Following auditions of the Arcs and Obelisks with the very helpful (and patient) guys at Audio-T Reading, both in the shop and at home, I have been very impressed with the Obelisks. They do much of what the Sl2s achieve so well plus plenty more besides, and despite having read up a fair amount, they quite surprised me.

So much written online suggests you need to get used to the Shainians' presentation and that the presentation is pretty much all they are about, but I found they sounded right from the very first moment they were hooked up, and that they offer much more than only (impressive as it is) a very extensive and quite precise soundstage with uncanny presence, height and depth. They also time well, have a deep but controlled bass - albeit not quite as articulate as the Sl2 where it goes - and very accurate tonal rendition of acoustic instruments, orchestra and voices across all registers and genres. And they do scale most impressively despite being smaller than the Sl2s.

The problem is that having heard the Obelisks I am now considering the Hawks. Any comments on how the two compare from Hawk owners who used to have Obelisks (or vice versa) would be much appreciated especially in the areas of bass extension and articulacy, midrange detail and treble balance and extension. I'd also be curious whether they are as happy about being moved around the room, so they can live in a less than optimal position closer to the walls but be moved out easily for serious listening, despite not being on casters like the Obelisks. I cannot audition the Hawks before buying.

A further surprise in the demos was listening to the Rega Isis and Osiris combo, which come very close to the 555/552/500 in drive, dynamism and clarity while surpassing them in tonal accuracy for acoustic/voice and in flow. They have a very nice organic sound, all in just two boxes, and the Isis can also serve as a DAC (albeit not for hi-res). Switching over from the 500 series, the first surprise was, however, quite simply how similar they sounded. A real achievement from the Rega guys, but I'll be waiting for the new Dynavector amps to finally arrive before making any decisions.

Will post a few pics as soon as I get to the Mac (dying of the lurgie at the moment....).

Mike

Mike, I had new Obelisks for 6 years and replaced them with new Hawks (now owned for 7 years). 

I liked the Shahinian presentation straight off and found it gave music a more 'live performance'.

The Hawks are far superior, particularly in the mid-range. Bass is more articulate and the treble sweeter, but that's all to be expected, just by looking at the construction and design. They have the same signature sound, but so much better than the Obelisks.

Hawks are pretty heavy and not on castors, so moving is not really practical. If you have A5 cable, this makes moving even less practical.

Carpet, suspended wood floor and granite blocks ruin the articulate sound. A lot.

Many thanks count.d, that's very helpful and what I'd hoped, except on the moving in and out front.

I'd be sliding the plastic feet on a hardwood floor (see pics that follow). The floor under the hardwood is solid concrete. No carpet, though maybe a rug or dog cushion or two...

Do you still have yours 27" out from the walls? From what I recall of earlier posts of yours our rooms are about the same size.

In mine, the Obs worked very well out about 19-20". The A5 didn't interfere with wheeling them about.

So here are the pics, one showing the Obelisks next to the Sl2s for size comparisons:

And the other showing them on their own, with Molly doing her very best HMV impression:

Mike, mine are 23" from the back (27" away from glass door recessed) and 33" from the side walls. As long as they're 20"+ from the back, I found them to sound fine. IME moving them further away just gives you a slight change in presentation, but not an improvement in quality. Mine are toed in very slightly.

Solid floor is perfect, just don't put anything between feet and floor. 

The 4 larger mid-range drivers and the isolated module really is a good improvement over the Obelisks. Voices become so much more realistic. Obelisks are great (my brother has a pair, so still easy for me to compare), but the Hawks do let one's system 'breathe'. It's a shame Hawks have become ludicrously expensive over the years. What is the current retail price?

They're £16k now. Do you reckon it's not going to be feasible sliding them backwards and forwards over a wooden floor?

Lastly is the bass faster than the Obelisk as well as deeper?

Many thanks for your help with this.

I have the Obelisks in a very suboptimal position but they still sound wonderful. So much better than several other more recent designs we gave tried. They "should" be further out from the back wall and not next to a chimney breast but that position is dictated by our living room. No other speaker  that we have tried has come close. 

Hawks weigh around 40kg each so sliding them around could be harder than you think

Yes, 36 kg, but they're on flat plastic feet... hmmmm Does everyone leave them in situ?

Mike,

They do go deeper, but the numerous improvements are greater than isolated comparisons. They just sound more effortless, less pushed and generally more open. More air around the recording, if you like. The Diapasons go further again, but the money has to stop somewhere. Shahinian don't seem as room dependant as other manufactures to me. Every source upgrade I've done since owning them has made my system sound so much better and I wonder where/if it will end. I've never felt the Hawks are holding any aspects of my system back, but I can hear the limitations of the Kaitora, for example. I could also hear the limitations of the Obelisks when I had them, but they are great. 

Mine are on concrete plinths to avoid the suspended floor. The surface of the plinths is polished granite and they slide very easily on this, so much so I have to be careful walking around them, in case I knock them. If your floor is particularly shiny and hard, I would have thought they'd slide quite easily. The feet soles are rounded nylon type material.    

Many thanks that's both very helpful and encouraging. The Diapasons are of course a temptation, but I can imagine them being too bassy for the room, with the double bass drive units and radiators closer to the floor than on the Hawk. Although they do have castors....

Order for the Hawks placed today. Many thanks for your help count.d - and of course the ever professional and immensely patient Simon at Audio-T Reading and John Burns at Pear Audio, the Shahinian importers.