ODS123

Thanks! ..My wife and I came to an understanding. She'd allow my big 2-channel system to be set up in our great room so long as I did everything possible to make it look nice. I consider myself lucky - most of our friends and family think it's kinda ostentatious and more than one said they'd say "no way". ..But it really has been a blessing. But setting it up in our great-room it has made music a family bonding activity.

I'm sure you're right - the Forte's probably would sound terrific in my room as well. Not that I should be over influence by appearance but I also preferred the way the Cherry CW3's matched my cabinets and floors. The Cherry veneer on the Forte seemed wayyy lighter. Also, visually I think the Fortes wouldn't have filled the space b/w the cabinets and wall quite as nicely. But this is subjective of course. Yes, I was able to play with placement at the dealer but only so much.

The delta between recorded music played through speakers and real live music is so huge that the few extra steps digital gets us to real music is almost meaningless. It's like instead of being 50 miles away, you're 49.9 miles. People loved recorded music just as much when I was a kid when ALL we had was analog playback (vinyl and tape). The clicks, pops, vinyl surface noise, tape hiss, etc... are all gone today yet recorded music is no more AND no less effective and helping us through pain when things are bad or enhancing our joy when all is right. So trashing either format is rather silly and misses the whole point of recorded music.

All great points. I will add this gripe about Digital Music.... When all we had was vinyl people would generally hear a whole album side before either changing the record or flipping it. ..Advancing the stylus to the next song or finding the lead-in grove to a favorite track was such a pain that people were more apt to listen to the whole album side. This would lead to becoming better acquainted and maybe even growing to love lesser known tracks. Case in point: If I was given Springsteen's "Greetings From Asbury Park" in digital-file format today I'd probably listen ONLY to Blinded By The Light, but having been introduced the LP on vinyl, I grew to love almost EVERY track on that album. "Blinded" grabbed me immediately, but others - for instance "Lost In The Flood" - took several listens to enjoy. They were less accessible but are now cherished tracks that today I might not ever listen to. Witness how kids listen to music today.. The idea of buying, much less listening to, an entire album is anathema to them. The convenience of Digital music has given them a form of musical ADD. Heck, my kids will often not even wait until a song has mostly finished before moving on to the next. Can you imagine constantly doing that with a turntable? ..Just another reason why to appreciate vinyl even if it doesn't really sound better.

Agreed. That a piece of rock being dragged around a vinyl disc can sound so good is indeed a miracle. And though I don't share the view that vinyl sounds better than digital I do believe it sounds good enough to be very very enjoyable, particularly when played on a high quality table (ie. inaudible wow & flutter, accurate speed) that is properly set up. To those trashing the format I would ask: So what does one do with the hundreds and hundreds of records they acquired prior to digital? Throw them away simply because they suffer by comparison to digital? ..Not everyone has the $ resources to replace all their vinyl w/ digital and in some cases it's not available. So what then? If you're truly a music lover and not just a gear-geek, I'd think you'd find ways to enjoy vinyl despite it's shortcomings.

Thanks!! ...Yes, Buddy Holly was incredible. ..To think of how much incredible music he made in his short life is just staggering. "True Love Ways" sounds absolutely magical on my Cornwalls, and probably on any Klipsch speaker.

I preferred how the Cornwall III's sounded but they are extremely large and imposing looking. They are passably attractive in our great room - my wife was ok with getting them. However, if this room was smaller, they would be visually overwhelming, in which case she wouldn't have been and I would have had to make do with the F3's. As for sound, the CW's sounded more expansive and open, and they extend deeper - though not by much and thus noticeable only on a sub-set of my music But again, the F3's sounded very good as well. I think the CW's are also a bit easier to place because they don't have a rear-firing passive-radiator. ..The F3's might have had to stick out further in the room. ..But that's a guess.

I'd personally look for an integrated amp. As far as I'm concerned separate pre-amp & amps offer no audible advantage. So why deal with extra boxes and cable clutter if there isn't a performance upside? Separates also add expense AND they CAN present more hiss/hum problems b/c they introduce more connection & grounding points. If you plan on incorporating a sub be sure your integrated has provisions for that. Onkyo, Yamaha, NAD, Emotiva..(and others) all have reasonably affordable offerings. ($300-$500). All of these (I believe) also have tone and balance controls, something I feel are essential to enjoying as much of your music library as possible. ..But you may not care for these features, which is fine of course. There are even cheaper offerings on Amazon that may work well but the brands are so obscure that you may have challenges getting them serviced. As for wattage requirement, take a look at this wattage calculator. ..Thanks to your speakers high efficiency, it's hard to imagine ANY amplifier or AVR being unable to meet your SPL requirements. https://geoffthegreygeek.com/calculator-amp-speaker-spl/

Well, what are you using now? And if you’re not happy with it, why?

Spend more for more features and form factor. Better sound? Possibly not.

Vandersteen does this (driver matching) even on their $2,700 2ce Signatures, or so he claims.

Um... These are $15,000 speaker built to order - which takes 6-8 weeks. ..They got the time. They can run-in the drivers as they build the cabinets. Alternatively, they could simply allow sub-performing speakers to show up at dealers, fail comparison tests, then watch demand for the speaker disappear completely. They promote the idea of break-in because it helps reduce the number of speakers that get returned to dealers.

Please be more clear. I have no idea what you're saying here. Again, I can't fathom Totem shipping a $15,000 speaker system that is performing sub-optimally simply just because they couldn't find a way to break-in a handful of drivers for a few days.

Yes, this is true. ..But the surround material is chosen for it's imparting minimal drag on the cone. And the motor magnet is chosen for it's ability to overpower whatever drag is caused by the surround. This is what a speaker does... And why would a speaker company allow a $15,000 speaker leave it's factory TRULY believing it won't sound it's best for 200-250 hours (i.e., The Totem Wind)?? ..Why would they risk the speaker being set up in a dealer's demo room then comparing unfavorably to whatever ALL BECAUSE they didn't find a way to break their drivers in before mounting them in the cabinet?? If they REALLY believed in break-in and it helped avoid unfavorable demos, I do believe they'd find a way to do this before packing / shipping. ..A few minutes of break-in is plausible. ..But 250 hours? It's incredible that they very first spec they list is break-in hours. It's almost like they're saying, please listen to these for a full 250 hours before calling your dealer to say 'I'd like to return these - I've been listening to them for a few hours and I'm not really feelin' it."

An interesting perspective. And I agree. I believe head/ sinus congestion, hearing fatigue (..eg., if one just spent the day at a loud sporting event), the coming and going of headaches, and of course mood all affect what we hear day to day. AND, the excitement of plugging in a new component, cable, or tweak... can certainly affect what we hear.

Or take a new pair out of the box, play one speaker overnight, then the next day play both using a mono recording and use your balance control to alternate b/w the speakers. Be sure to set them right beside each other or you'll be comparing L vs. R room acoustics. I've done this very thing with several speakers and could not hear one iota of difference.

Second only to PWK himself, isn't Richard Crites another esteemed speaker guru that many on this site look up to? Here are his thoughts on Break-in: From the FAQ section of his website: Q: How about break in time for drivers or new driver diaphragms? A: Yes, and depends on the size of the driver. Tweeter diaphragm probably break-in at a matter of seconds. They are very low mass and move very little, so any break in would happen almost instantly. Probably happened when the factory tested the diaphragm after manufacture. Midrange are a bit bigger and have a bit more mass. Break-in is probably on the order of minutes with these. Woofers would take the longest. I think that break-in on a 12 to 15 inch woofer would be less than an hour played at pretty good volume using music with a lot of low frequency con Q: But my speakers sound so bright after putting in the new caps that I have to hope they change with break-in. In fact I am pretty sure they are getting better as I listen longer. They must be changing. A: .. The fact that you think they are changing now is because you are getting used to them sounding like they should. The break in is occurring but it is inside your head instead of inside the speakers. Q: How about break in time for wires and interconnect cables? A: None

B E A U T I F U L ! ! Congratulations!! The Indian Rosewood looks lovely! Enjoy!

That is true, but scientific understanding is not broadened or deepend by those who eschew any reasonable validity testing.

Sorry but that strikes me as pseudo-scientific pablum. I suggest you try explaining to an electrical engineer how there are differences b/w new and used signal cable that escape measurement but are nonetheless captured by our ears. PWK would definitely point to his BS badge, I'm certain of it.

You guys seemed bemused by this which is probably the healthier view to take. ..Me? ..I think it's fraud and it hurts our hobby.

It's funny how only in Audio do companies get away with claims about needing "burn in time".. Why don't the signal cables in Medical equipment, aircraft, and military equipment need this burn-in time before they function properly? Does the imaging in MRI and CT Scan machines improve with hundreds of hours?? Does control of aircraft with fly-by-wire systems improve with time? No, of course not. The gullibility in this hobby is absolutely stunning at times.

Really? ..Klipsch Pro Series Speakers should be preferred b/c of toxic off-gassing?? You guys are too much. Thankfully, my Cornwall III MDF-ed. speakers have excellent manners w/ respect to bodily functions. ..No discernible off-gassing. I wish I could say the same.

To give audio connoisseur snobs an imaginary bragging right over the other 99.9% of speaker owners?

Hasn't this been discussed? Okay, here goes again... MDF vs Ply water resistance: Water resistance in a home speaker is of no greater importance to me than water resistance in an Amplifier, CD player, Music Server, or TV. ..None of these were ever engineered to get wet. In all of my years owning audio gear I have never had a speaker or a component get wet. Ditto with respect to drop-resistance. ..None of my other components are designed to be dropped on their corner, so no need for my speakers to be. To me, suggesting Ply is superior because of this is to provide a solution that is in search of a problem. MDF vs Ply longevity: I have 30 year old MDF speakers that look perfect - no signs of spontaneous disintegration. Peruse audiogon and you'll see dozens and dozens of MDF speakers over 30-40 years old that have not come apart or been bounced.