PDA

View Full Version : Re: how do VAF DC-X VAF I-66 and VAF I-93 compare ?


Mal P
03-05-2005, 08:19 AM
Howdy,

Having owned both the DC-X and I-66, and having heard the I-93 with my own
pre-amp/amp (albeit at someone elses place) I'll try and articulate the
differences between the speakers.

The DC-X is quite bright, with a harsh mid-range and lean bass. Having said
that, having been my first pair of speakers all those years ago, I thought
they were the bees-knees. They do have excellent imaging and can go pretty
loud.

The I-66 is comparitively smoother, and without the mid-range harshness of
the DC-X. While not as bright, it is still a little lively, and the bass is
a bit fuller and better rounded off. It certainly does extend deep. Imaging
and soundstaging are superb. The mid-range is quite forward however,
providing a seat-of-the-pants, front row experience. It could be the VAF
"house" sound, or it could be the magnesium mid-ranges, which can be
notoriously difficult to work with.

As a side note (to boast really), the Dynaudio Confidence C1 bookshelf
speakers I currently own are very different again... they are oh so very
smooth, and with a relaxed, perhaps a touch laid-back and non-fatiguing
character to the mid-range and treble (it employs the Esotar2 tweeter). The
mid-bass is very full, and the speaker's overall character is rich, and a
little dark. I'm actually thinking of going with the floorstanding models in
the Confidence range... my new living room will be far too small but if I
move again and I want a speaker I can live with for 10 years... perhaps best
to compromise for now.

So really it depends what type of sound you prefer... the Signature range is
probably more exciting and involving than the Dyn's, but I can live with the
latter a whole lot more.

Sincerely,
Mal

"carl" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
news:423fa032$1@quokka.wn.com.au...
> I am wondering how these compare in sound quality etc
>
> carl
>
>

gringo
03-05-2005, 08:19 AM
how do the I-91 stack up? I've heard these, and really enjoyed the sound.
Though I've not compared to anything else.


"Mal P" <pandorastein@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:423fceec@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> Howdy,
>
> Having owned both the DC-X and I-66, and having heard the I-93 with my own
> pre-amp/amp (albeit at someone elses place) I'll try and articulate the
> differences between the speakers.
>
> The DC-X is quite bright, with a harsh mid-range and lean bass. Having
> said
> that, having been my first pair of speakers all those years ago, I thought
> they were the bees-knees. They do have excellent imaging and can go pretty
> loud.
>
> The I-66 is comparitively smoother, and without the mid-range harshness of
> the DC-X. While not as bright, it is still a little lively, and the bass
> is
> a bit fuller and better rounded off. It certainly does extend deep.
> Imaging
> and soundstaging are superb. The mid-range is quite forward however,
> providing a seat-of-the-pants, front row experience. It could be the VAF
> "house" sound, or it could be the magnesium mid-ranges, which can be
> notoriously difficult to work with.
>
> As a side note (to boast really), the Dynaudio Confidence C1 bookshelf
> speakers I currently own are very different again... they are oh so very
> smooth, and with a relaxed, perhaps a touch laid-back and non-fatiguing
> character to the mid-range and treble (it employs the Esotar2 tweeter).
> The
> mid-bass is very full, and the speaker's overall character is rich, and a
> little dark. I'm actually thinking of going with the floorstanding models
> in
> the Confidence range... my new living room will be far too small but if I
> move again and I want a speaker I can live with for 10 years... perhaps
> best
> to compromise for now.
>
> So really it depends what type of sound you prefer... the Signature range
> is
> probably more exciting and involving than the Dyn's, but I can live with
> the
> latter a whole lot more.
>
> Sincerely,
> Mal
>
> "carl" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
> news:423fa032$1@quokka.wn.com.au...
>> I am wondering how these compare in sound quality etc
>>
>> carl
>>
>>
>
>

Mal P
03-05-2005, 08:19 AM
I've only heard the I-91 briefly at the same place I heard the I-93s - as I
recall, it was very smooth. I didn't pay too much attention to it as the
specs on the VAF website did scare me a bit, they appear to be quite rolled
off. They do use a completely different driver (a polyproylene coaxial I
believe) so the sound over more extended listens I would imagine would be
quite different from the I-66/I-93... certainly no large resonance peaks to
tame like the SEAS Excel magnesium cones.

Sincerely,
Mal

"gringo" <holycrapuscuk@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:qhQ%d.7157$C7.1535@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> how do the I-91 stack up? I've heard these, and really enjoyed the sound.
> Though I've not compared to anything else.
>
>
> "Mal P" <pandorastein@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:423fceec@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> > Howdy,
> >
> > Having owned both the DC-X and I-66, and having heard the I-93 with my
own
> > pre-amp/amp (albeit at someone elses place) I'll try and articulate the
> > differences between the speakers.
> >
> > The DC-X is quite bright, with a harsh mid-range and lean bass. Having
> > said
> > that, having been my first pair of speakers all those years ago, I
thought
> > they were the bees-knees. They do have excellent imaging and can go
pretty
> > loud.
> >
> > The I-66 is comparitively smoother, and without the mid-range harshness
of
> > the DC-X. While not as bright, it is still a little lively, and the bass
> > is
> > a bit fuller and better rounded off. It certainly does extend deep.
> > Imaging
> > and soundstaging are superb. The mid-range is quite forward however,
> > providing a seat-of-the-pants, front row experience. It could be the VAF
> > "house" sound, or it could be the magnesium mid-ranges, which can be
> > notoriously difficult to work with.
> >
> > As a side note (to boast really), the Dynaudio Confidence C1 bookshelf
> > speakers I currently own are very different again... they are oh so very
> > smooth, and with a relaxed, perhaps a touch laid-back and non-fatiguing
> > character to the mid-range and treble (it employs the Esotar2 tweeter).
> > The
> > mid-bass is very full, and the speaker's overall character is rich, and
a
> > little dark. I'm actually thinking of going with the floorstanding
models
> > in
> > the Confidence range... my new living room will be far too small but if
I
> > move again and I want a speaker I can live with for 10 years... perhaps
> > best
> > to compromise for now.
> >
> > So really it depends what type of sound you prefer... the Signature
range
> > is
> > probably more exciting and involving than the Dyn's, but I can live with
> > the
> > latter a whole lot more.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Mal
> >
> > "carl" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
> > news:423fa032$1@quokka.wn.com.au...
> >> I am wondering how these compare in sound quality etc
> >>
> >> carl
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>