thommo wrote:
I wish I had the confidence to wade into a thread and in my first contibution, tell the original poster that they've got shit ears.
Kans are impressive on first listen - my point was to listen to a few others and determine if it really is nervana.
Sure you can make most "quality" loudspeakers sound good with careful matching of the amp and source - but the best loudspeakers sound good whatever the amp and source and sound absolutely bloody stunning when synergy is obtained.
If you look at the second hand prices of speakers (dictated by supply and demand) Sarahs, Isobariks and Kans go for pennies compared to say LS35A and AE AE1s and Tannoys or even the JR149 which used to retail for about half the price of a pair or LS35As.
It appeared thedesign criteria for the Sarah (we mused when I worked in the trade) was designed to be the same dimensions as a Lin Sondek box - clever buggas reduced packaging costs. It probably wasn't but we were trying to work out how anyone could design such an awful looking loudspeaker that in real terms didn't offfer better sonics than equivalent priced loudspeakers at the time (remember these sold for £500 ish when you get get a pair of NS1000s for £600 or Gale GS401s for £400).
I will say it again - just listen to a few others to make sure that there is nothing out there that you do like better or when you want to change your amp or source you may just end up restricting yourself. If you really really like them then they are very very cheap now so it will be wallet and sonic nervana if that is the case.
Uzzy:nerd: