What do you think of these 3 speaker choices, kef, boston, b&w? (1 Viewer)

[Jesse Sharrow]

Ok we are about to buy a new house so I dont have a ton of money but I want some good qaulity. I am going to do bookshelfs first with out a sub. I am going to get the front towers later but I can get the bookshelfs for now. I am going to be using a denon avr-982 90X2 at 8ohms.

I am interested in these 3 speakers. All bookshelfs.

Kef XQ1 with stands about $760

Boston VRM90 with stands about $550

B&W CDM1NT with stands about $870

Dont ask about the prices. I get the kefs and bostons through accomadation and the B&W's from another store through a hookup.

I am going to be listening to alot of music with these mainly techno. When I am not listening to music I will mostly be using them for tv and some movies.

If I am able to spend a little more money I will invest in a sub also. Thank you for your help.

 

[David W Johnson]

Speakers are the most subjective components of any system. What might sound good to my ears might not sound good to yours. The best thing to do is to try and arrange some type of audition with each of the three models you've mentioned. Listen to each speaker (preferably in your own listening environment) before making a decision.

If you can't arrange for an audition, for my money, I would go with the B&W's.

 

[MikeTrotter]

I would go B&W also.I would also look into if the speakers you buy now can be moved to HT for later.Makng sure there matching centers, rears, etc.That way if you decide on a HT system down the road,you can go from what you already have.Just a thought.

 

[Skyler]

B&W, KEF, and the Bostons WAY back in 3rd. If you have a hookup, you may try & give the Energy Veritas bookshelfs a listen. They sound great! I have B&W CDM 9NT's myself, they are excellent. If I was looking for bookshelfs, it would be very tough between the Veritas & the 1NT's.

 

[Jesse Sharrow]

Well I think for the money and the ones that I enjoyed the most are going to be the bostons. I listened to all 3. I think I have decided I will be happy with any of them.

 

[Jesse Sharrow]

Ok that didnt make any sense.

Basically what I just tried to say was....

I reall do like the sound of the bostons. I think I will be very happy with them. THey sound great for music. But I think I would be happy with any of them. I am going to upgrade to VRM90's in the future for the fronts... and use the 60's as my rears. But I still have till x-mas. I am going to listen to all 3 again. I do like the B&W's also but they are alot more.

 

[Jon_Welker]

Jesse,

Few things here, first are you looking to initially buy the VRM60's or 90's? In your first post you state 90's, and now it seems like 60's. I'll guess 60's since you are going with bookshelfs. I think that $550 for a pair of VRM60's is a pretty stellar deal. I did some extensive listenign myself to the VRM80's a little while ago, and it just happens that I listen to a fair amount of techno as well. My #1 audition track on techno is Cehmical Brothers "Come With Us" off their new album titled the same. I REALLY liked the way the 80's handled this song, and other techno as well (BT, Crystal Method). I mean they sounded very nice, very clean. They sounded pretty good for movies as well, but there are some better choices out there, and there are some much worse choices out there.

Fast forward today, and I just did some listening to some KEF XQ5's. Listened to the same Chemical Brothers track (a few times), and the hyper tweeter on the XQ's really offered a different sound for this song than I am used to. As a point of reference, I am using some NHT T5's for my mains. The highs were much more pronounced and upfront. They were a little more lively overall than my T5's, which are more neutral and extremely clean sounding. Also, listened to the new Audioslave disc on them, and had the same feeling about the music being more lively, and offering up a totally sepatate way of producing highs. The hyper tweeter really does add something different to this speaker line.

Now, for the B&W's. I extensively tested the CDM 7NT's a few months ago, and while they produced a good sound, I just wasn't that big on how they handled groups like 311 and other rock music. They tended to get a little jumbled up on the 311 track "Down" off of their self-titled album. True, the CDM NT series sounds great for classical, jazz, blues music if that's what you listen to. I listen mainly to the rock, hip hop, techno, etc., and the CDM NT's did not fit my personal tastes.

I know that these are not the exact same models that you are looking at, but I thought I would offer up my experiences as they are in the same model lineup. Hope this helps. Based on a pure value for the money for music playing with a techno emphasis, here would be my order of recommendations:

1. VRM60's
2. XQ1's
3. CDM 1NT

 

[LanceJ]

Um, Boston Acoustics is not waaaaay below KEF and B&W in technical innovation or quality of construction. More like what Nissan is to Toyota IMO.

Now, if you don't like the way they sound, that's O.K. then!

Maybe they don't use audiophile-approved "tweaks" that cost out the wazoo but do little--if anything--to improve the actual audible sound but who cares about that?

If anybody wants to see how high-end Boston can get, do a search on their Lynnfield Project from about five years ago, which is what most of their present models are based on. I heard the $5K "500L" speakers once and nothing from those English companies sounded any better. Maybe louder, but not better.

Don't be fooled by BA's "fun" image folks (car audio, slightly goofy website text, etc): they know what they are doing. Otherwise I wouldn't own Bostons myself.

LJ

 

[Kip Lackey]

It's really about what you like best since none of us will ever hear them in your house!

FWIW, I own Boston's and really like the sound. You seem to be getting a good deal either way so get what makes you happy. I've listed to Paradigms, B&W and Vienna Acoustics in my room but wouldn't take any of them over my current setup. The Lynnfield tweeter in the Boston's is super smooth.