E-mail comments or questions to feedback@soundstagehifi.com.

Class-AB Amplifier for Vivid Audio B1 Decade Speakers

Hi Doug,

As you’re well familiar with Vivid Audio speaker technology, I’d like to know whether you have any general suggestions on amp matching. I currently use a Devialet Expert 220 Pro integrated amp, but I have an itch to experiment. Do you have any thoughts about pairing a classic class-AB amp with Vivid speakers? It’s not that I’m unhappy with the Devialet, it’s just that I might like to bring a touch of warmth to the mids. I note that the former US distributor for Vivid used Luxman amps, for instance, in demos. Also, I think you might have used a Hegel amp in some of your Vivid reviews.

My only music source will be a Lumin T2 streamer, which uses Leedh digital processing and negates the need for a preamp. Also, Lumin advises using a balanced connection, so that would be a requirement for any amp I choose.

My budget is up to $7500, and I don’t mind buying used.


All the best,

Michael (owner of an identical pair of Vivid B1 Decade speakers to the ones you reviewed)
United States


I love Luxman’s products, but if you’re buying new, $7500 won’t be enough to get you into the M-700u power amp, which is priced at $8995 in the US. If you can find one used, that’s a different story. It’s rated to deliver 120Wpc into 8 ohms—I think you’ll need that kind of power to get the best from the B1 Decades. However, your budget is more than sufficient to get you a new Hegel H20 power amp, which I think is priced at $6000.

The Hegel H20 is rated at 200Wpc into 8 ohms, which is more than enough power for your Vivids. In my opinion, the Hegel is as good a place as any to start—many of our writers own or used to own Hegel products and none of them have ever had a complaint. In fact, writer Hans Wetzel has purchased three Hegel integrated amplifiers—the H300, the H360, and now the H590—and will probably turn to Hegel again if the company releases a new model.

If the H20 doesn’t float your boat, see if you can stretch your budget to buy a Luxman. If that’s not possible, and you can’t find one used, then write back and I can probably give you more ideas.

As for your speakers, I’m jealous—I loved the way the B1 Decades looked and sounded when I had them in my room, and I hated to send them back.

Doug Schneider

Paradigm Founder Series 100F Update

To Doug Schneider,

I’m really looking forward to the Paradigm Founder Series 100F loudspeaker review. When will the review be posted?

Will Campbell
United States

Hi Will,

I’ve received so many e-mails about the Paradigm 100F that I’m starting to think it will be the most popular review I write this year. I had hoped it would be online this month, but, with some other important projects needing completion, it’s been pushed back. Look for it to be published in July.

Doug Schneider

Totem Acoustic Skylight vs. Bowers & Wilkins 607 S2

Hello Doug,

I just finished reading all that you wrote on the Totem Acoustic Skylights on March 1, 2020, and must say I find these speakers hard to resist. I have yet to hear them, but will be doing so very shortly. I am considering them as replacements for my Monitor Audio Bronze 2 speakers (circa 2004), which are getting fragile. The woofer cone has separated from the membrane on one of the speakers again—the last time was on the other speaker, so I am getting concerned. I like the sound of the Bronze 2, and had the Bronze 1 before.

My system is basic, I guess you could say. The amp is an integrated TEAC A-H500 (circa 2000) putting out 50Wpc into 8ohms. I am also thinking about Bowers & Wilkins 607 S2s, but have read that they need a very powerful and high-end amp to make them sound good. Both the Totems and the B&Ws are in the same price range, within about $100. I mostly listen to classical (baroque) and jazz.

If you have time and feel the inclination, your thoughts, as brief as they may be, would be greatly appreciated.

Robert Groulx

Hello Robert,

Whenever someone asks about getting a Bowers & Wilkins speaker these days, I have to put out the same words of caution: listen before you buy—which you seem to be doing anyway. The reason for the warning is that for the last ten years or so, the Bowers & Wilkins design team has consistently voiced their speakers to have a prominent treble response, to the point that their speakers often sound very bright. The 607 S2 is no exception. I haven’t reviewed a pair, but I’ve heard them—and the speaker is voiced with too much treble energy for me. From what I heard, however, the midrange and bass seemed clean and neutrally balanced. But some people are really attracted to a tipped-up treble, which is why prospective buyers have to listen themselves to know for sure if they’ll like a pair of 607 S2s, or pretty much any other B&W speaker in current production.

By the way, I don’t think that a pair of 607 S2s needs a higher-end amp, or all that much power. That idea probably came from trying to tame down that treble by mixing and matching different electronics. Oftentimes, when someone finds a match that is sonically pleasing, they’ll come to the mistaken conclusion that it’s due to the quality of the amplifier, or some other component, when, in fact, it has to do with the voicing of the speakers that the electronics are feeding.

In contrast to the 607 S2, the Skylight, like other Totem Acoustic speakers, has a more balanced sound—it would never be construed as being bright. Knowing what I do about Monitor Audio’s speakers, I have a feeling that a pair of Skylights will be more similar to what you’re listening to already, so that might sway you, too.

But will the bright sound of Bowers & Wilkins appeal to you? I encourage you to listen to both the 607 S2s and the Skylights and make up your own mind.

Doug Schneider

Doug the Nut

Doug, you nut!

My home theater has four Rythmik Audio L12 Direct Servo subs acting as speaker stands for the two front KEF LS50s.

Honestly, there is no such thing as too many subs unless you have to step over them. Having a true 20Hz–20kHz system does not suck.

Some people prefer giant monkey coffins to a sub/sat system, but I think that liberating your mains from the burden of reproducing low bass pays a lot of sonic dividends. And, of course, you can place the subs where they sound best if your room is less than ideal acoustically. Fortunately, my room is awesome so that’s not a problem.

All the best, you kook.
Jeffrey Henning
United States

Hello again,

Four subwoofers does seem excessive to me, but if it works for you, I won’t argue with the approach. I also won’t argue with you when you say that a system that reproduces from 20Hz to 20kHz “does not suck”—it’s what many audiophiles dream of.

Doug Schneider

Where Is the Bryston B135 Cubed Review?

To Doug Schneider,

A couple of weeks ago, I received a SoundStage! Network e-mail that contained a link to the SoundStage! Take 2 video review of the Bryston B135 Cubed integrated amplifier. The link led to a YouTube presentation by Jay Lee, who indicated that Philip Beaudette’s review of the B135 Cubed was upcoming. So, two weeks later, I’m writing to inquire as to when you think the review might be published. I’m waiting for it with great anticipation as I’m thinking of purchasing the amp.

Yvon Provencher

Hello Yvon,

The Bryston B135 Cubed review is scheduled to appear on this site on June 15, but since we’ve had it in the review queue for longer than we would’ve liked, we’ll probably “leak” it about a week early.

Doug Schneider

Paradigm Founder 100F Listening Impressions

To Doug Schneider,

I had a lengthy audition of a pair of Paradigm Founder Series 100F loudspeakers at K&W Audio in Calgary, and thought I would share my impressions. They were being driven by a 300Wpc McIntosh MC312 [stereo amplifier]. They’re pretty much superior in every way to my Studio 100 v5 speakers—as they should be, for the price. Some things stood out for me: breadth of soundstage and imaging; smoother, more resolving treble; midrange clarity and articulation; and tight, full bass, down to 30Hz at least.

I started off with Loreena McKennitt’s “The Lady of Shalott” to gauge female vocals, and immediately got goosebumps. This track sounds great on the Studios too, but the Founders were definitely next-level: broader, deeper soundstage, and much more clarity and detail in her voice. My Studios have been knocked for having harsh, overly bright treble, which I think is overly critical, but the top end of the Founders is definitely a big improvement.

I moved on to Wynton Marsalis’s In Gabriel’s Garden, tracks 30–32, to check out trumpet and orchestra. Trumpet was accurate, clean, and authoritative; orchestra seemed a tad warm, but I’m not sure if that was the recording, the amp, or the speakers. I didn’t notice it as much on other recordings.

I finished up with track 12 of the SACD of Music for Organ, Brass and Timpani, “The Great Gate of Kiev,” to give the Founders a workout. I was particularly curious to see if they could do a better job of reproducing the most challenging passages in this track, as things can get a bit muddy on my Studios. They didn’t disappoint—they were much cleaner and more articulate, and every timpani thwack, even in the loudest and densest passage, was clearly audible. I expect the McIntosh was helping with this, as its 300Wpc definitely out-muscles the 200Wpc Emotiva XPA-5 Gen2 amp that I’m driving my Studios with. Nonetheless, I think the Founders are significantly more resolving and capable of playing dense, full-range music loudly than the Studios are. They were definitely rolling off below 30Hz, but that’s to be expected. Anyone wanting to reproduce deep pipe-organ notes will be crossing over to a sub in that range, or will spring for the Founder 120H loudspeakers if they want to run strictly two-channel.

Anyhow, I thought I’d share my impressions and I look forward to your full review.

Best regards,
Dean Craig

Hello Dean,

Thanks for the update! I’ve completed most of my listening to the pair of Founder 100Fs that I have in for review, but I still have to photograph them and take them to Canada’s National Research Council to be measured. But my full review should be published fairly soon.

Doug Schneider

The Hot Treble on the Bowers & Wilkins 705 Signature

To Diego Estan,

In your recent review of the Bowers & Wilkins 705 Signature loudspeakers, you said: “But also like the 705 S2’s, the 705 Signature’s treble is a bit hot for my taste.”

Did you see the frequency-response measurements of these speakers? They’re horrible. Anyone who listens to a variety of music could not possibly live with these speakers for an extended period of time unless they have no idea what live music really sounds like.

My question is this: Why has B&W gone down this road?

United States

Hi Tony,

Yes, of course I’ve looked at the in-room measurements I made when reviewing the 705 Signature, and at our NRC anechoic chamber measurements. I have a couple of thoughts as to why B&W might be purposefully making its tweeters hot in the treble region. In other words, tipped up in level.

First, upon initial listening, it’s impressive. The extra output between 4kHz and 6kHz adds “air” around voices. On the flip side, if you listen to something with excess sibilance, it won’t sound pleasant. Second, I think it really depends on your preferred listening levels. I listen fairly loud, peaking at 90–95dB (when I listen critically—not for background music, obviously). At these volumes, the B&W treble is way too hot. But if you listen at, say, 75dB, I actually think the bumped-up treble on the 705 Signature sounds good. Fletcher-Munson curves, which relate to the perceived loudness of frequencies at differing volume levels, demonstrate a real phenomenon.

It’s actually too bad, because those 705 Signatures sound killer in every other regard.

Diego Estan

Budget-Speaker Predicament

To Doug Schneider,

I enjoyed your reviews of the Triangle Borea BR03 and Q Acoustics 3030i loudspeakers.

I’m building a budget 2.0 audio system for non-nearfield listening in a room 14′ × 18′. Sadly, I can’t do auditions due to the pandemic.

I’m planning on pairing a Dayton Audio DTA-2.1BT2 (or similarly priced) amplifier with speakers costing about $500/pair or less, like the models you reviewed:

  • Triangle Borea BR03
  • Q Acoustics 3030i (3020i also not off the table)
  • Elac Debut 2.0 B6.2
  • DALI Spektor 2
  • Wharfedale Diamond 12.1
  • JBL Stage A170/A180/A190
  • PSB Alpha P5
  • Klipsch RP-600M

What would you do in such a predicament?

All the best,
United States

Hi Bob,

You have a couple of predicaments. One has to do with the contenders you’ve chosen—they’re all potentially good choices, so it’s going to be tough to choose a model. The only one that I think you could take off the list is the Q Acoustics 3020i. As you’ve read my write-up on the 3030i, you’ll know that it provides quite a bit more bass extension than the 3020i, which, in comparison, sounds a little too light in the low end. So if you’re going to look at a Q Acoustics speaker, only consider the 3030i. The other models you listed are still contenders.

The other predicament you’re in is what you’ve identified—the inability to audition in a store. But you can audition speakers at home! So if I were in your shoes, I’d narrow down my list by first seeing which speakers can be auditioned in-home and returned in a reasonable timeframe, such as 30 or 60 days. The reason I think it’s so important to audition yourself is that I know far too many people who have purchased hi-fi equipment without listening, and without the option to return it if they didn’t like it. When that happened, all they could do was to sell it secondhand. Since you’re in the United States, I think you’ll find home auditions of speakers that you can buy online quite easy to find. I hope this helps.

Doug Schneider

Latency with KEF KC62 Subwoofers?

Hi Doug,

Thank you for the very interesting description of your experiments with a 2.2 sub-sat system. In my reading on the subject (at 6moons.com, for instance), I’ve become aware that subwoofer electronics can sometimes introduce a significant timing delay in the speaker output, creating a latency issue with the output from the main speakers. So much so that some users are apparently forced to reposition their subwoofers nearer to the listening chair in order to achieve a proper time-domain blend with the main speakers.

With the KEF KC62 subwoofers, did you encounter any such latency issues? Did KEF provide a latency value for the KC62? Did you make any adjustments in the Anthem STR preamplifier to compensate for latency, or was that unnecessary? More detail about this aspect of your sub-sat setup would be much appreciated.

Lee Morris

Hi Lee,

I didn’t experience any time-related issues like the ones you’re talking about, but I will say a few things that might help shed some light on the topic.

The analog crossovers used in most of the speakers on the market today introduce phase delays—a form of timing error—but this has never appeared to be a problem. Digital crossovers can add timing errors, too. What you’re referring to, however, is latency—in other words, a flat-out time delay as the signal travels from one place to another. It’s kind of like those old recordings of Mission Control talking with astronauts in space—the radio transmissions were delayed getting there, as well as getting back.

I suppose this kind of delay, if it exists, would be attributable to the design of the subwoofer itself. Since I didn’t experience this problem, however, I didn’t feel the need to ask KEF anything about the KC62’s latency.

But what’s probably most relevant in my setup is the Anthem STR preamplifier and its associated ARC Genesis room-correction and bass-management software. The sophisticated design of the preamplifier and software seems to deal with phase and other timing issues, as well as the frequency response. Most people I know who have tried to create a topflight sub-sat system didn’t have equipment like the STR and ARC Genesis, which could account for the problems they experienced, and why they had to resort to creative solutions to overcome them.

As far as placing the sub near to the listening position goes, you have to consider this: Moving the subwoofer from, say, around where the speakers are to the main listening position changes the timing relationships of the subwoofer and main speakers to the listener, but it also affects the frequency response of the sub as it plays into the room. Therefore, the listener might attribute the sonic improvement to the time-domain changes, but it could also be an improved frequency response that they’re hearing. Or maybe it’s both things, or something else entirely. But without more experimentation, including various in-room measurements, it would be difficult to know for sure what’s really happening. Just know that what I did didn’t result in any time-related problems like you’ve described. I hope that helps.

Doug Schneider

Focal Kanta No1 or KEF LS50 Meta?

To Doug Schneider,

Wow, just read your reviews of the Focal Kanta No1 and the KEF LS50 Meta speakers.

Why you ask? Because I’m about to swap out my Metas for the No1s and I was curious about your take on both speakers. Given the stellar reviews you gave them both, I would really value your opinion on the differences between these two and what I should expect to gain, lose, or find to be similar.

I noticed quite a bit of overlap in your description of the sound and ability to cast a wide soundstage for both speakers, which is something I love about my Metas. BTW, I will be pairing the No1s with two JL Audio E-Sub e110 subs, so the low end shouldn’t be a problem!

Anyway, like I said, I would value your unvarnished opinion if you have a few minutes to spare.

Thank you!
Michael Hubbard
United States

Hello Michael,

Here’s the thing about the KEF LS50 Meta—it’s a small two-way priced at about $1500 per pair, which is pretty low for high-end hi-fi, but its sound quality compares favorably with similarly sized speakers that cost much more. Just like the regular LS50 before it. That doesn’t mean the LS50 Meta will be better than all those more expensive speakers, but the LS50 Meta is definitely worth listening to before spending more.

You own a pair of LS50 Metas, and from the sounds of it you’ve made up your mind to move up to a pair of Focal Kanta No1s—which are about four times the price of a set of Metas. Thankfully, you’ve chosen a good speaker to spend that much more on. When I reviewed the No1, I was really impressed with its clarity, as well as its neutrality. In fact, I wrote about the pair: “These are the most neutral-sounding Focal speakers I’ve heard.” But that didn’t mean that the No1 was so neutral that the pair ended up sounding boring—the No1, like other Focal speakers I’ve heard, has some liveliness inherent to its treble that made the pair come to life in my room.

Where the No1 falls short is also where the LS50 Meta fails—both speakers can’t reproduce really deep bass. If I recall correctly, when it came to low-frequency extension, the No1s fell off a cliff at around 50Hz in my room. I was kind of surprised by this because the Kanta No1 has a 6.5″ midrange-woofer in a cabinet quite a bit larger than most stand-mounted two-ways, so I thought it might go deeper in the bass than most. But it didn’t. Still, you have those JL Audio subs, so they’ll give you the deep bass you need.

Insofar as what you expect in sound, I think that you’ll find that since both speakers are voiced to have a relatively neutral tonal balance, they’ll sound more alike than different. But they definitely won’t sound exactly the same—I’ve never found two speaker designs that, even if they look almost identical, sound the same. Unlike, say, solid-state power amplifiers, which can often be difficult to distinguish by their sound, there are always noticeable differences between loudspeakers. And since these speakers aren’t even close to looking the same, I think you’ll hear quite a few differences.

One area that I suspect might be flat-out better with the No1 versus the LS50 Meta is the ability to play more effortlessly at higher volume levels. I say that because the No1 is quite a bit bigger than the LS50 Meta, both in terms of the size of its cabinet and its midrange-woofer driver, so it’ll move air more easily. That, however, is about all I can tell you. Instead, I’d rather hear from you after you’ve listened to the Kanta No1s so you can tell me how you find the two pairs of speakers differ.

Doug Schneider

More Articles ...