Phantom Resolution....anyway to improve...?

[Johnnydev]

It seems to me that it is pretty logical that a small speaker has less resolution (or weaker sound) than a big one.
Nothing new here...
BUT what is important with the phantoms is that it is close enough.
What you gain is: less occupied space, less cables, lovely "design" speakers, etc.

If you NEED the best sound possible, the phantoms are not the answer.

The phantoms are a compromise (but a very good one).

A compromise?? And small had less resoltion. Yes that was the case before devialet came with the phantoms.  

Just wait untill you have the branches

[fgueho]

I won't have the branch. My wife doesn't like them.
And I don't have an old 20k+ setup to compare. So I just don't mind.

[Johnnydev]

It seems to me that it is pretty logical that a small speaker has less resolution (or weaker sound) than a big one.
Nothing new here...
BUT what is important with the phantoms is that it is close enough.
What you gain is: less occupied space, less cables, lovely "design" speakers, etc.

If you NEED the best sound possible, the phantoms are not the answer.

The phantoms are a compromise (but a very good one).

A compromise?? And small had less resoltion. Yes that was the case before devialet came with the phantoms.  

Just wait untill you have the branches

Maybe do someting with your cables, my internet cables are audioquest cat 700 and streaming on the highest resolution with qobuz is incredible      

And from my tv with an audioquest diamond optical Toslink cable is also very very great 

[Confused]

From What hifi's review of the Phantom:

"We’d just like a little more subtlety and expression – each note is clear, but how it is being played isn’t always so much. It is that layer of musicality at which traditional hi-fi, even at far lesser cost, excels in ways the Phantom can’t. Generally we’d say the two shouldn’t be compared, but, at this cost, to us that level of subtlety matters."
Read more at http://www.whathifi.com/devialet/silver-...i3JOMHi.99

I know many have criticised this review because it was just a single silver reviewed, and I guess many would not believe a single word written in advert infested What hifi anyway! Having said that, there does appear to be some commonality between these comments and MountainGuy's original post?

[fgueho]

As I said Previously, you have to look at the big picture.
The phantoms are not ALL about the sound.
I believe it is not the greatest sound in the world. And why should they be?

BUT :
- it's a small speaker
- it's a lovely designed speaker
- my wife like small and lovely thing that you can't see in the living room
- the sound is more than okay

So it's the BEST compromise you can have.
It's just a bit expensive...

[Johnnydev]

From What hifi's review of the Phantom:

"We’d just like a little more subtlety and expression – each note is clear, but how it is being played isn’t always so much. It is that layer of musicality at which traditional hi-fi, even at far lesser cost, excels in ways the Phantom can’t.  Generally we’d say the two shouldn’t be compared, but, at this cost, to us that level of subtlety matters."
Read more at http://www.whathifi.com/devialet/silver-...i3JOMHi.99

I know many have criticised this review because it was just a single silver reviewed, and I guess many would not believe a single word written in advert infested What hifi anyway!  Having said that, there does appear to be some commonality between these comments and MountainGuy's original post?

Yes that's possible when i heard one phantom playing in a store, i must say it was for Shire not my choice.

But when i tried 2 phantoms at my home i was totally blowed away 

[Johnnydev]

From What hifi's review of the Phantom:

"We’d just like a little more subtlety and expression – each note is clear, but how it is being played isn’t always so much. It is that layer of musicality at which traditional hi-fi, even at far lesser cost, excels in ways the Phantom can’t.  Generally we’d say the two shouldn’t be compared, but, at this cost, to us that level of subtlety matters."
Read more at http://www.whathifi.com/devialet/silver-...i3JOMHi.99

I know many have criticised this review because it was just a single silver reviewed, and I guess many would not believe a single word written in advert infested What hifi anyway!  Having said that, there does appear to be some commonality between these comments and MountainGuy's original post?

Yes that's possible when i heard one phantom playing in a store, i must say it was for Shire not my choice.

But when i tried 2 phantoms at my home i was totally blowed away 

[sleach]

Yes, reviewing one phantom was underwhelming, but devialet have been marketing this as a Bluetooth speaker which is a category whathifi reviews.

Phantoms perhaps seem to have less sparkle but when I listen, all the information is there. To me it is presented in a very smooth and enjoyable way. I think some high end gear gets too bright and edgy trying to emphasize that top end treble. The phantoms have quite a natural, non fatiguing sound.
My Geithains do some things better, but the phantoms offer something Great for a reasonable price.

Positioning helped me too. I have them with bass traps behind them and this made quite a difference. You need to manage the profiles bass energy



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[yesgrey]

As I said Previously, you have to look at the big picture.
The phantoms are not ALL about the sound.
I believe it is not the greatest sound in the world. And why should they be?

BUT :
- it's a small speaker
- it's a lovely designed speaker
- my wife like small and lovely thing that you can't see in the living room
- the sound is more than okay

So it's the BEST compromise you can have.
It's just a bit expensive...

One of the best descriptions I've read about the Phantoms with which I agree 100%, and exactly because of the last I decided to return mine.

What I liked less in the Phantoms were the voices. Always sounded a little bit electronic to me... but, to be honest, this year I went to the High-End show in Munich and didn't return too impressed with all the equipment I heard there... the ones that pleased me most, considering its price, were precisely the Phantoms. The one I liked most were the B&W nautilus with Devialet amplification, it sounded like a real guitar was being played in the room!

IMHO, considering its price, I think Devialet could have gone for a better mids unit and tweeter, and that probably would have made them sound more like we expect for their price...

[MountainGuy]

Thanks for all the responses.

I do note that resolution and transient speed is not dependent on speaker size. Small bookshelves can have fantastic resolutionad speed. I think of size as being more related to bass extension - with the Phantoms breaking that rule of course.

Also, the resolution issue is not physical cable related as the audio is wireless via Tidal.

The phantom offers nice sound with unprecedented small size for the bass extension and, if you like it, aesthetics.

Sounds like it is what it is - no way of improving the resolution. I do agree with the comment that they could have gone with better mids and tweeter - perhaps beryllium tweeters. But that would add more $$$$.