Oh please, please let that be true! Those would be the perfect solution to my rear surround channel problems with regular Phantoms as front channels. It would seal the fate of my D120.
I say that is a pretty good endorsement - especially this quote...
Question deux: Does the Phantom sound as good as an Editor’s Choice $50,000 stereo system, featuring a gaggle of components, oxygen-free python cables, and monolith speakers? No. But the disparity isn’t a chasm; it’s more like a small gap.
So to naysayers... what say you?
From my personal experience my B&W's didn't stand a chance and 3 months on, I don't regret my purchase. Not ONE BIT!!
And it's Vive
la France! (and not "le")
Honestly, Wired should know better!
Guillaume
(24-Jun-2015, 17:07)trashken Wrote: [ -> ]![[Image: phantom-ft-582x388.jpg]](http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/phantom-ft-582x388.jpg)
http://www.wired.com/2015/06/review-devialet-phantom-2/
Quote:"Back in the Paris, Arnault and his billionaire boys club are already discussing the development of a Devialet budget model, something in the mid-three-figure range that Apple Stores can sell through their global network like party favors."
God no...
If that is a portable player with ADH technology in it, I'll have one. Or even better, have it in your iPhone! Ooh yeah!
(25-Jun-2015, 11:06)stonedragon Wrote: [ -> ]I say that is a pretty good endorsement - especially this quote...
Question deux: Does the Phantom sound as good as an Editor’s Choice $50,000 stereo system, featuring a gaggle of components, oxygen-free python cables, and monolith speakers? No. But the disparity isn’t a chasm; it’s more like a small gap.
So to naysayers... what say you?
From my personal experience my B&W's didn't stand a chance and 3 months on, I don't regret my purchase. Not ONE BIT!!
I second this, 100% same with me!
(25-Jun-2015, 17:35)streamy Wrote: [ -> ] (25-Jun-2015, 11:06)stonedragon Wrote: [ -> ]I say that is a pretty good endorsement - especially this quote...
Question deux: Does the Phantom sound as good as an Editor’s Choice $50,000 stereo system, featuring a gaggle of components, oxygen-free python cables, and monolith speakers? No. But the disparity isn’t a chasm; it’s more like a small gap.
So to naysayers... what say you?
From my personal experience my B&W's didn't stand a chance and 3 months on, I don't regret my purchase. Not ONE BIT!!
I second this, 100% same with me!
Hi stonedragon; streamy
What B&W's versions are you both referring to, please? It'd be good to know.
Regarding the quote from the review, I guess it's a good idea to make less expensive version, because the idea of having to spend $10K in a surround system, it's not a good feeling. Like another said, for rear it'd be good, apparently...
(25-Jun-2015, 19:01)Dvlt PhD Wrote: [ -> ] (25-Jun-2015, 17:35)streamy Wrote: [ -> ] (25-Jun-2015, 11:06)stonedragon Wrote: [ -> ]I say that is a pretty good endorsement - especially this quote...
Question deux: Does the Phantom sound as good as an Editor’s Choice $50,000 stereo system, featuring a gaggle of components, oxygen-free python cables, and monolith speakers? No. But the disparity isn’t a chasm; it’s more like a small gap.
So to naysayers... what say you?
From my personal experience my B&W's didn't stand a chance and 3 months on, I don't regret my purchase. Not ONE BIT!!
I second this, 100% same with me!
Hi stonedragon; streamy
What B&W's versions are you both referring to, please? It'd be good to know.
Regarding the quote from the review, I guess it's a good idea to make less expensive version, because the idea of having to spend $10K in a surround system, it's not a good feeling. Like another said, for rear it'd be good, apparently...
Hello mate. I had the B&W 803D's, with music fidelity 550K superchargers attached. My whole rig was about 10K. Sounded great, but these little beauties are in another leauge in so many ways. I can't praise them high enough. I have 3 at the moment and movies sound fantastic. I don't have any lip syn issues.
(25-Jun-2015, 19:01)Dvlt PhD Wrote: [ -> ] (25-Jun-2015, 17:35)streamy Wrote: [ -> ] (25-Jun-2015, 11:06)stonedragon Wrote: [ -> ]I say that is a pretty good endorsement - especially this quote...
Question deux: Does the Phantom sound as good as an Editor’s Choice $50,000 stereo system, featuring a gaggle of components, oxygen-free python cables, and monolith speakers? No. But the disparity isn’t a chasm; it’s more like a small gap.
So to naysayers... what say you?
From my personal experience my B&W's didn't stand a chance and 3 months on, I don't regret my purchase. Not ONE BIT!!
I second this, 100% same with me!
Hi stonedragon; streamy
What B&W's versions are you both referring to, please? It'd be good to know.
Regarding the quote from the review, I guess it's a good idea to make less expensive version, because the idea of having to spend $10K in a surround system, it's not a good feeling. Like another said, for rear it'd be good, apparently...
I have first edition B&W 802 (not actual 802 diamond). They are still working well, but have clear deficits in Bass reproduction compared to the Phantoms. Mids of the 802 are less neutral, sound stage is slightly narrower.
Thanks, stonedragon; streamy.
I finally read the whole WIRED review. Boy, he does really stresses that it's worth your money. I like that.
I listened to B&W's CM10 S2, not too long ago, (at Best Buy showroom), and was disappointed. Came to the conclusion that it wasn't worth it for ANY price. It costs $4K a pair. Probably not the best listening place, but... what can i say. Funny how I was interested in checking out CM10 S2, after reading some reviews online from purchasers...
One thing THAT taught me was to not believe I can like something just because somebody else says it's good.
I wonder if Phantom is the exception...
They sure have done something different, haven't they?