I have a pair of Diva Bes & they are absolutely not bright. John Atkinson of Stereophile said this when he tested the Utopia Maestro 111 on one of its settings:
"I preferred the balance with them set to "3," which took away most of the mellow top-octave quality. But, my goodness, this is one smooth tweeter.... & "...a touch mellow in the top octave..."
Regarding imaging:
"I had wondered about the Maestro Utopias’ imaging, given the fact that the tweeter is set within a wide baffle, though this does have a slightly convex curve. I shouldn’t have been concerned. The dual-mono pink-noise track from Editor’s Choice (CD, Stereophile STPH016-2) was reproduced as it should be: as a very narrow spot of sound midway between the speakers, without any splashing to the sides at any frequencies. The instruments on Rendezvous were stably placed in space precisely where I had mixed them to be, with excellent image depth where appropriate."
My Divas have a much narrower baffle and the Scala is about 12% less wide then the Maestro - most likely helping image better then Atkinson says of the Maestro.
I have the strongest doubts the Evo offers any particularly noticeable improvements over the non Evos. Unless one is biamping, which it was designed for. Biamping inevitably introduces the colourations of the xover into the mix as it simultaneously adds its own virtues in (ideally) a two steps forward, one backwards kind of way - if it works well. It has to be approached carefully.
It must be remembered Focal has done literally nothing meaningful to improve the Utopia line (in sonic terms) since Jacques Mahul left. Despite the re-engineering of the tweeter & assorted tweaks of the Utopia 111s , I & everyone I know can hear no difference between it & its predecessor. None of the reviews anywhere of any of the 111 line have ever compared any of them to its predecessor (a common practice in audio reviews). Why do you suppose that is? Exactly.
Are you absolutely convinced you need new ones? The money saved on getting first generation Bes can be applied elsewhere to great sonic effect.
"I preferred the balance with them set to "3," which took away most of the mellow top-octave quality. But, my goodness, this is one smooth tweeter.... & "...a touch mellow in the top octave..."
Regarding imaging:
"I had wondered about the Maestro Utopias’ imaging, given the fact that the tweeter is set within a wide baffle, though this does have a slightly convex curve. I shouldn’t have been concerned. The dual-mono pink-noise track from Editor’s Choice (CD, Stereophile STPH016-2) was reproduced as it should be: as a very narrow spot of sound midway between the speakers, without any splashing to the sides at any frequencies. The instruments on Rendezvous were stably placed in space precisely where I had mixed them to be, with excellent image depth where appropriate."
My Divas have a much narrower baffle and the Scala is about 12% less wide then the Maestro - most likely helping image better then Atkinson says of the Maestro.
I have the strongest doubts the Evo offers any particularly noticeable improvements over the non Evos. Unless one is biamping, which it was designed for. Biamping inevitably introduces the colourations of the xover into the mix as it simultaneously adds its own virtues in (ideally) a two steps forward, one backwards kind of way - if it works well. It has to be approached carefully.
It must be remembered Focal has done literally nothing meaningful to improve the Utopia line (in sonic terms) since Jacques Mahul left. Despite the re-engineering of the tweeter & assorted tweaks of the Utopia 111s , I & everyone I know can hear no difference between it & its predecessor. None of the reviews anywhere of any of the 111 line have ever compared any of them to its predecessor (a common practice in audio reviews). Why do you suppose that is? Exactly.
Are you absolutely convinced you need new ones? The money saved on getting first generation Bes can be applied elsewhere to great sonic effect.