"Hi everyone,
I want to share the weirdest experience of my audio / high-end life with you. I've been living with a new set of phantom golds for the past 2 weeks. They are on the tree stands in perfect stereo triangle the way I would set up other systems. As I'm a sound engineer my room is treated to have the perfect dampening/reflection ratios with absorption/dispersion... in the strategically important spots.
For me the phantom gold experience is the single most disappointing experience I've ever had with an audio product. After having tried them also in other rooms, I have to say: how can anyone in this forum deem this a good high-end product? Anyone who ever heard a truly good system would be unable to make such judgements. What I hear is this:
The good:
For the speaker question my advice coming from 18 years of high-end experience:
I think a lot has to do with expectation and taste. I have a much more expensive system that also includes a PS Audio Directstream for a DAC with speakers that list for 10 times the cost of the phantom. Is it better than the phantom? No doubt. Slightly better air, more solid and palpable centerfill( though some of this has to do with my placement) and more organic sound. One has to remember that the phantoms cost as much as the Directstream itself does. I have Golds in another location and when I listen to them I enjoy the experience immensely and do not feel deprived. In general, with most components that I have had, i find myself favoring music that plays to their strengths. I wouldn't shy away from listening to a string quartet with the Phantoms but it wouldn't be my go-to music. I agree they do shine on electronic music. I am a sucker for solid bass, a huge soundstage, and speakers that become invisible. The Phantoms check all the boxes. I have had Martin Logan CLX's in the past. They did much wonderfully but in all the areas I just mentioned, the Phantoms have them beat. Not saying they are better, but they are more fun IMHO.
As to your question, I have heard the expert pro line with expensive high-end speakers, sounded good to me, but if you liked the PS Audio Directstream I suspect you will find it better but still wanting.
I want to share the weirdest experience of my audio / high-end life with you. I've been living with a new set of phantom golds for the past 2 weeks. They are on the tree stands in perfect stereo triangle the way I would set up other systems. As I'm a sound engineer my room is treated to have the perfect dampening/reflection ratios with absorption/dispersion... in the strategically important spots.
For me the phantom gold experience is the single most disappointing experience I've ever had with an audio product. After having tried them also in other rooms, I have to say: how can anyone in this forum deem this a good high-end product? Anyone who ever heard a truly good system would be unable to make such judgements. What I hear is this:
The good:
- They are spectacular for watching movies and playing videos games as the lowest octaves are truly rock solid and the amp power is there.
- They are very good for all artificially created sounds (e.g. electronic music). (Oddly the transients are not so slow here).
- Bass power. Bass impulse response.
- Lack of ported speaker design artifacts.
- Acoustically recorded music: almost unbearable. All instruments sound as if somebody has poured liquid plastic over them.
- The decay of the instruments is not realistic.
- Transients: terribly rounded and slow. I can only assume that this is due to the mid-range driver and tweeter. The mid-range driver has far too little radiation area and cannot move enough air, especially when having to compete against these woofers. Same for the tweeter. In this designs config, they would have to be horn-loaded to become seriously alive. Both drivers seems to be slow and sluggish, they just have too much mass. This metal material of the mid-range driver seems to be a very poor choice.
- Soundstage: mushy. no true "phantom center". no stable and clear left-right or front-back localization. everything is somewhere somehow.
- Mids: practically non-existent. A true mid-hole. As said, the radiation area of the mid-range driver is a joke in comparison to the woofer capabilities. The result is an unbalanced energetic dispersion across the frequency band.
- Highs: Where is that extra high-end sparkle of the golds? I had the silvers previously, which I sold after 2 weeks as well. I got the golds due to the wish for convenience and all reviews suggested that the problems are fixes. They are not. The highs of the golds are a little better (10%) but are miles away of what a true hifi/high-end driver can do. Especially a ribbon or air-motion-transformer or even an electrostat.
- Sound density: the claim of Devialet to bring dense sound is true which leads to instruments not having breathing space around them. Everything is mushed together.
- Dynamics: Not there. Everythings seems to have almost the same playback level. Micro-dynamics: forget it. Macro-dynamics: sometimes when there's real volume jumps in the source material. All the musical intricate dynamical details are lost completely. This is most off-putting as in theory, I had assumed, the amp technology would be able to deliver this. But the drivers are not. Maybe it's also the firmware and I guess the devices have waaaaaaay too much jitter. Also, as the electronics are inside the speakers they are probably victim to microphonics. Even with this amp technology.
- soulless
- like plastic
- slow transients
- lack of micro-dynamics
- mushy soundstage
- mid-hole
- ...
For the speaker question my advice coming from 18 years of high-end experience:
- Buy speakers that make as few mistakes as possible so they don't need to be DSP corrected.
- Buy speakers with as few crossovers as possible.
- Buy speakers with the largest radiation area possible (highs & mids also, not only bass).
- Buy speakers with the lightest drivers possible (little mass).
- Buy speakers that either don't have a box (open baffle) or a box that is absolutely vibration free if you don't fancy dipoles.
- Buy speakers that are either Coaxes or Line Sources.
- Magnetostatic transducers: ribbons, air motion transformers. ("Piega Master One" was the best, I've ever heard).
- Electrostats (full range having no crossovers at all).
I think a lot has to do with expectation and taste. I have a much more expensive system that also includes a PS Audio Directstream for a DAC with speakers that list for 10 times the cost of the phantom. Is it better than the phantom? No doubt. Slightly better air, more solid and palpable centerfill( though some of this has to do with my placement) and more organic sound. One has to remember that the phantoms cost as much as the Directstream itself does. I have Golds in another location and when I listen to them I enjoy the experience immensely and do not feel deprived. In general, with most components that I have had, i find myself favoring music that plays to their strengths. I wouldn't shy away from listening to a string quartet with the Phantoms but it wouldn't be my go-to music. I agree they do shine on electronic music. I am a sucker for solid bass, a huge soundstage, and speakers that become invisible. The Phantoms check all the boxes. I have had Martin Logan CLX's in the past. They did much wonderfully but in all the areas I just mentioned, the Phantoms have them beat. Not saying they are better, but they are more fun IMHO.
As to your question, I have heard the expert pro line with expensive high-end speakers, sounded good to me, but if you liked the PS Audio Directstream I suspect you will find it better but still wanting.