Most-Read Feedback Articles (Last 365 Days)
- 2016-09-24 - Amphion's New 3LS Loudspeaker
- 2016-11-01 - Hegel H360 vs. Devialet 120 or 200?
- 2016-10-27 - Vivid Giya G3 vs. Vivid B1 Decade vs. KEF Blade Two
- 2017-01-15 - Luxman L-550AX -- the Little Amp that Probably Can
- 2016-10-26 - B&O BeoLab 90 Video and Review
- 2017-05-01 - A Paradigm Active/40 Owner on Active Speakers
- 2017-07-01 - The Luxman's League
- 2017-01-24 - Sonus Faber Olympica III vs. PSB Imagine T3
- 2017-04-15 - Here's What Happened to the Devialet Gold Phantom
- 2016-11-02 - Bryston Mini A and Mini T
- Category: Reader Feedback Reader Feedback
- Created: 29 October 2013 29 October 2013
To Doug Schneider,
I just read your article comparing the sound of these two Sonus Faber speakers. I want a set of new Sonus Faber speakers but I cannot afford the Olympica III. However, I can easily handle the Venere 3.0 and would probably get it with the wood trim. Just how much would I be losing with the Venere 3.0 vs. the Olympica III?
The price difference between the Olympica III ($13,500/pair) and the Venere 3.0 ($3498-$3998/pair, depending on finish) is huge, so I’m not surprised that you can afford one quite easily but not the other. That said, the Olympica III, despite being the better-built and superior-sounding speaker, isn’t three or four times as good in those respects as the Venere 3.0 is, which is what the price difference implies; rather, as the article I wrote says, it’s about 25-30% in the various areas. As I also mentioned, sonically they’re cut from the same cloth, so you’re getting something similar sounding with the 3.0 for a fraction of the III's price.
So if Sonus Faber is what you want and the 3.0 is what you can afford, go for it -- my suspicion is that you’re going to be very happy with what you get. . . . Doug Schneider