A Second Visit to the Home of the Infamous Encinitas Jim

While flamenco is not my favorite genre of music, “Juerga” is an excellent test of a system’s ability to accurately reproduce explosive dynamics. In System #1, transients were exceptional with excellent leading edge definition, coupled with accurate decay. This was particularly evident with sharp hand claps and the contact of the metal taps on the dancer’s shoes with the wooden floor. Manitas De Plata does this cool knocking on the body of his guitar, while playing. De Plata’s voice was highly nuanced, roughened from a life of cigarettes and strong drink (he’s still performing at 92 !). In comparison, the same cut played on the Marten S-2 had more bass energy, but perhaps less snap, and at times just a hint of edginess.

Switching to Fricksay playing the Beethoven “Egmont Overture”, the Marten S-2s again had more low bass and mid bass energy, but almost excessively so. One listener felt that the Marten/ Berning combination was more tonally interesting than the Triolon/ Acapella Integrated combination. The Triolons were more immediate and, in my opinion, more linear and balanced. As with the Marten S-2s, crescendos can be a bit harsh on massed strings on this recording. Horn crescendos were a bit less harsh on the Triolons than on the Marten S-2s. The Marten S-2s seem to have a frequency dependent sensitivity most apparent when the horns hit a crescendo that causes harshness/ distortion (perhaps this is a room artefact). The same horns through the Triolons were more natural and more properly integrated with the remainder of the instruments. Drums were another area that highlighted differences between the speakers. Again, the Marten S-2s had more bass energy, but we could hear the head/ skin of the drums more clearly with the Triolons and there was better decay and integration, as well as less overhang. The spotlighting of certain instruments/ frequency bands on the Martens could be very exciting, but in the end I found myself gravitating toward the approach of the Triolons. Note that this “spotlighting” may be a matter of personal preference which some will like more than others. In the end I could gladly live with either speaker. (By spotlighting, I mean selective alteration of the frequency response that has the effect of bringing a voice or instrument forward in front of the remainder of the orchestra. Note that I am aware that this is often done in the mixing studio. In this instance, playing the same software on both systems, I assumed that when this only happened on the Marten S-2s that it was an anomaly.) The Marten S-2s often felt tonally richer, the Triolons a bit leaner, but with more immediacy.

Signature Transport Power Base/ Diamond Power Base – EAR 912 Professional Preamp – Emm Labs XDS1 v2 – Marten M Class D Monoblocks

Throughout all our tests, both speakers exhibited very high resolution. The balance between the upper frequencies of the violin seems ‘nicely’ integrated with the remainder of the orchestra on the Triolons. With the Marten S-2s, bass energy is more prominent and they moved more air particularly in the bottom octave. The deep bass of the Martens offset any tendency which they may have to emphasize the leading edge of massed strings playing in their upper range. Here, the balance is between weight, power and bloom (Marten S-2s) vs. control, speed and leading edge (Triolons). If I had to associate a single word with each, it would be power (Marten S-2s) vs. finesse (Triolons). In some ways the sound of each speaker corresponds to the sound which you would hear at different locations in a symphony hall. The sound of the Triolons corresponds to what one might hear when seated very close to the stage where direct sound predominates over reflected sound; the sound of the Martens to a seat much farther back in the hall.

Substituting Jorma Prime interconnect for Nordost Odin in the S-2/Berning combo increased midrange complexity at the expense of leading edge and some loss of top end extension. Some high frequency, low level detail was also sacrificed.   One of the last things to which we listened was the theme music from the movie “Zorba the Greek.” Again, the Triolon/Acapella Integrated seemed to create a sense of more air around plucked instruments; however, detail was equal on both. There was a bit more presence/ leading edge with the Triolons. The Marten S-2/Berning combo added a pinch of sugar. In louder, more complex passages, the differences increased. The energy level of the two speakers is roughly similar but differently distributed. The voicing is clearly different. The Marten S-2s are a bit meatier, the Triolons more linear. The combination of the Acapella Integrated/Triolons does an absolutely stunning job of recreating the acoustic of the space where something is recorded. The last thing which I heard was the Dire Straits, “Brothers in Arms.” With the Triolons there is an enormously heightened sense of presence and aliveness associated with a sense of greater detail and greater stage width/ greater horizontal separation of the instruments

Conclusions

Last evening in my first really focused and intense listening session since returning home, I attempted to put my time listening to Jim’s system in perspective. Based on listening to much of the same music which we listened to in Encinitas, I was able to reach some conclusions with respect to the sound of Jim’s systems. There was more treble awareness on the Triolons, less on the Marten S-2s as perceived via tape hiss or surface noise on original source, a slight sense that the energy level or tuning of Triolons was centered at a slightly higher frequency than on the Marten S-2s, giving the Triolons a more immediate or “present” presentation versus the Marten S-2’s sense of smoother and ever so slightly fuller body (immediacy of horns done right vs. a dynamic speaker). Leading edge and phase accuracy are a strong suit of both. On the Marten S-2s, the violin’s leading edge was somewhat muted, still detailed and “present,” but slightly “tamed,” balanced, if you will, by the strength of the bottom. The Marten S-2s produced piano notes which were of slightly fuller body, as if the felt on the key pads was softer, newer, less compressed and at the same time with a richer or weightier harmonic overtone. This was captivating, but bordering on excessive when compared to the same notes on the Triolons, which were seemingly a bit faster with more sense of space between them on rapid runs and a shade leaner. The harmonic overtones on the Marten S-2s slightly concealed or overshadowed the next piano note being struck. Were the Triolons too edgy? Were the Marten S-2s too sweet? There are distinct differences, but neither system seems to be lacking in detail, resolution, dynamics, surge…the oomph just comes at a slightly leaner level on the Triolons and a slightly smoother level on the Marten S-2s. My ear tends to seek out and lavish the crisp detail of the Triolon until it hits a seemingly edgy note or extra energy in leading edge violin, but on a quick shift on the same cut on the Marten S-2s one realizes that the same detail and resolution are present but that detail that caught your ear is slightly less pronounced. This difference could lead to personal taste preference, but I’ve been unable to detect a “flaw” in either.

No doubt the room acoustics affect this, and quite possibly the positioning of the S-2’s do as well, but I don’t think either is the primary thing. And, the differences which the amps are making are key. Contrasting with the treble of the Triolons that makes you more aware of the tape hiss is a sort of occasional rumble of the bass elements that comes out of the Marten S-2s…an ever so soft distant thunder that it’s picking up on the recording. In contrast, the Triolons driven with my Balanced Kegons are somewhat richer and more harmonically complex in the upper bass and mids with slightly less sense of leading edge prominence. Call it a bit less edgy and more musically consonant, but without the Marten S-2’s ability to move the huge amounts of air in the bass. The bass level of the Marten S-2s is adjustable and we did cut back on the bass level early in the listening sessions.

So where does this leave things? The Bernings (tubed with the NOS GE 211’s) strike me as a touch leaner on the Triolons than the Acapella Integrated, if your point of reference is the Western Electric 300B. Both the Audio Note (UK) Balanced Kegon 300B direct heated triodes (Dagogo, March 01, 2009) and the Bernings are so good, I am not sure that the differences which I hear are not the differences inherent in the sound of the 300B vs. the 211. [The owner later had access to the new Psvane Replica 845 and has reported that the Psvane significantly mitigates the leaness which I heard.] The Acapella Integrated might be a better match, but both are clearly superb amps. Here I think that personal preference would be the decider. The Acapella Integrated did a very nice job with the Triolons. It somewhat ameliorated the sense of leanness without compromising the pristine top end. With respect to the speakers, both are world-class. Preference is a matter of taste.

To summarize, a listener who leans toward a richer, warmer sound and is somewhat less concerned about getting that last small bit of detail (let’s call this a more “romantic” sound) could well prefer the Marten S-2/ Berning combination. A listener more interested in a neutral presentation with an emphasis on air, placement, detail, and consistency across the frequency spectrum (though still musical) might prefer the Triolons driven by either the Berning or Acapella Integrated amps. I feel that the Triolon/ Audio Note Balanced Kegon combination that I own tends to give me some of both; however, in all fairness, I have not done a side by side comparison between the Acapella Integrated or Berning 211/845s in my home, so must withhold final judgment. The contribution that Jim’s room made to the sound of each system was also a complicating factor, as were differences in the way that he and I have chosen to set up the speakers. Jim’s have a significant degree of toe-in with the tweeters firing at the listener’s ears, whereas mine have almost no toe-in and the axes intersect several feet behind the listener. For me this yields a more believable stage with better focus and depth. There are also other differences in our speakers, including the additional woofers in each cabinet in Jim’s version of the Triolons and certain changes to the crossover that have made the speaker an easier load for output transformer less amps.