Optical to Arke's (Part 1 & 2)

We shall know more when Chris can compare a Purifi and a Keces in his system.

The Keces didn't really sound broken in my system, it just sounded very uninspiring, flat and lifeless compared to the Purifi. I think everything was working fine, it was just a stark example of very different sounds. In hindsight we should have listened to the Keces first as I think we would've enjoyed more and listened more before trying the Purifi. IMO the Purifi is just more transparent and can handle the bass ALOT better. Getting the bass right makes everything MUCH better and sorts timing.

I have experienced this issue quite a few times when I demo speakers now. My brother came to stay last year and we listened to Discovery 861s, Revelator 851s and Vaders. I had foreseen what would happen, as had been listening to all speakers for a few weeks.

We started with the Discovery 861s and my Brother was extremely impressed. We listened to a range of music for 2 hours and thoroughly enjoyed the speakers. We then swapped to the Revelator 851s and repeated for about 2 hrs. Again we thoroughly enjoyed the speakers.

Then the Vaders went in and my Brother's jaw dropped and his eyes we were wide open. He was blown away. We then listened for hours again.

At the end of this demo we were thoroughly impressed with all speakers and all had performed incredibly well at their 'price point'.

If we had conducted this demo in reverse it wouldn't have worked. When we tried to switch back from Vaders to 861s or 851s we just knew so much better was available and switched straight back to Vaders. My point is that the 861s and 851s are exceptionally good speakers, but the Vaders offer more and can shine a critical light.

I believe the Keces is exceptionally good (as demonstrated in 2 other systems) but in my system the Purifi shone a critical light.



Edit: I shall add more info in due course, but I/we believe the difference in room responses is the most likely reason. Both Oli and Chris's rooms have a lack of energy from 80-120Hz. My room has a reasonably good response here, perhaps slightly extra energy. If mid/upper bass is even slightly loose in my room it muddies everything and has a detrimental effect on timing. The Purifi has an iron grip on the bass, so timing is impeccable. Any amp (in my room) lacking impeccable grip seems to suffer unreasonably so. I believe Oli's and Chris's rooms may be more forgiving as this mid/upper bass is toned down.

It's always hard to speculate as how does one describe a relative difference? Chris and I strongly preferred the Purifi on my system, but another person may notice little difference or have the opposite preference.

It makes for an interesting forum chat, but ultimately the only real way is to listen yourself.

I have been to (too) many hifi shows and read the post show reports. People rarely agree on what is good, bad or average. That's what makes it fun! Many post-show reports seem to laud the systems I thought were terrible - perhaps those people had vested interests.

I have a particular aversion to most 'show favourites' as I have a perceived over-sensitivity to HF and upper mids. Most people love stuff that is shrieky and shrill to me. Sometimes my favourite systems can be too laid back others.