Is it just me? .... (sound quality)

[IanG-UK]

From a previous user of Quad electrostatics over 30 years, and now Magico Q1s, my Phantom set up costs one tenth of the current main gear and gets incredibly close to delivering the same fulfilling output.

That's quite the accolade. You're saying that for the price, the Phantoms can keep up with a set of planars?!

I never actually compared Phantoms with Quads as I had, by the time of the Phantom launch, already got my Q1s and sold my Quad 2905s.

The Q1s were the only box loudspeaker I'd heard as being very similar to the Quads in terms of speed, transparency and imagery (within what was nevertheless a very large but capped budget).

So it is the Q1s and the Phantoms as I definitely regard as pretty close - though that's just for my listening, and room, and ears. (The Q1s, in my opinion, need nothing larger than a medium sized room. I have such a room which, quite possibly, did not do the Quad 2905s justice, but I will never know!)

[ChalleB]

getting back to the original questions in the post
concerning users experiences of the phantoms in relation sound quality for different types of music
don´t get me wrong I love my phantom, but large orchestral works do not impress nearly enough as dance/beats/jazz quartets etc.

so, will future software be able to improve these (mid-range heavy) limitations?
or might it be due to the mid and tweeter hardware itself?

[f1eng]

sorry, but could we get back to the questions in the original post?
i.e users experiences of the phantoms in relation sound quality for different types of music
don´t get me wrong I love my phantom, but large orchestral works do not impress nearly enough as dance/beats/jazz quartets etc.

will future software be able to improve these (mid-range heavy) limitations?
or might it be due to the mid and tweeter hardware itself?

I completely disagree with you about the shortcoming as it I hear in my room so I would neither expect nor hope for any software driven change to the sound quality.
I think they sound realistic with classical music.

[f1eng]

Phantom is based on obviously low efficiency drivers ( 3000 W to produce 105 dB ) - and that was clearly the only option to produce that awesome  bass in  such a tiny volume.

You got this bit wrong. The units are high efficiency and high power is only needed/used over the deep bass frequencies where the DSP compensates for the bass roll off due to the enclosure size.

[ChalleB]

I am running a single phantom, and, although i like what I hear with small scale bands/dance/jazz quartets etc., large scale orchestral music dosen´t come across well at all.

Of course I realise that a stereo set up would be more impressive for orchestral music, but a single speaker just doesn´t work.
Try playing Bach, Arvo Pärt or Gesualdo and Devialets promises soon fade.

I am keeping my Phantom, but just trying to be honest.

[f1eng]

IME (I got my Phantoms in March) if the sound quality is disappointing from them it is because the recording quality is poor. They are very transparent and poor recordings sound exactly that, poor. Good recordings sound extremely realistic.

[ChalleB]

Hmmm .... the recordings are fine

[nigelb001]

sorry, but could we get back to the questions in the original post?
i.e users experiences of the phantoms in relation sound quality for different types of music
don´t get me wrong I love my phantom, but large orchestral works do not impress nearly enough as dance/beats/jazz quartets etc.

will future software be able to improve these (mid-range heavy) limitations?
or might it be due to the mid and tweeter hardware itself?

I completely disagree with you about the shortcoming as it I hear in my room so I would neither expect nor hope for any software driven change to the sound quality.
I think they sound realistic with classical music.

I'm with F1eng here and certainly don't hear any mid or tweeter limitations across music genres and I'm using a single Phantom.

I find that the Phantoms take no prisoners with poor recordings, but then I don't want a sound system that fills in and smooths off bad recordings to make them sound good if performance is compromised with beautiful recordings. So I'll take it as it is thanks!

[f1eng]

I am just running a single phantom, and, although i like what I hear with small scale bands/dance/jazz quartets etc., large scale orchestral music dosen´t come across well at all.

I have 2 silver phantoms in a room 5m x 10m room, well away from the corners. I also have a pair of Goldmund Epilog 1&2 and they are surprisingly close in sound given they are over 30x times more expensive without an amplifier. The Goldmunds are the best speakers I have ever heard too.

Mind you I haven't listened to much pop or jazz. I mainly listen to the rock music of my youth and classical from Bach to Mahler.
I have tried O'Daiko from that excellent SQ Japanese drum CD and it is astonishingly realistic (I have heard them live in Japan)

If they are not sounding good I would be concerned that either the source (including quality of the recording itself) or location of the Phantom in the room is non-optimum.

[ChalleB]

Glad to hear that people have another opinion.
But playing large orchestral music on a single phantom still feels very "limited" in my opinion (I wish it didn´t)
The quality of the sources are fine and I have also tried the speaker in several positions in several rooms.

I will be keeping my Phantom for all the other music I listen too, which sound really impressive, buts its going to be headphones for Mahler!