Montana speakers?

Not as good as the Talon Khorus

I've not heard the Montana speakers, but do own the tweeter that they use in their full line, the Scanspeak Reveleator 9900 (the designer told me they use a 4 ohm version). It has a combination of smoothness, speed, and dynamic contrast (both micro and macro), that no other tweeter of any type has, IMO. I also have the Morel MDT-33, and it trades off being barely not as smooth/liquid, for noticeably more dynamic contrast and authority. They're both better than the Dynaudio Esotar IMHO, which was so forceful that it imparted a "steely" character to attack transients, in the test project I'm working on. I've not heard Quads, but have heard ML's and Soundlabs. IMO, if you want to listen at quieter than lifelike levels, esl's are absolutely the way to go. Nothing comes alive at quiet levels like a good esl. If you demand liflike SPL's, a big cone/dome speaker is the way to go. In my experience, ESL panels turn hard and have a plastic coloration, even at moderate levels...where a very good dome tweeter sounds perfect, all the way up to as loud as it can go. Ribbons are very nice also, but trade off some dynamics, for unbelievable speed. And of course, if you have domes/cones several in series parallel, like the Pipedreams (or like one of the projects I'm planning), that can be "otherworldly", IMO. I've not heard the smallest Pipedreams system, but perhaps you should give it a listen...There's not a thing wrong with having the low bass speakers in a separate enclosure, that's how most of the world class speaker systems do it, and it allows the ultimate in low frequency extension, room loading and smoothness.

I am quite familiar with the Montana ES or is it EP Signature (4,500.00 Retail). A friend of mine owns a pair. Carl your remarks concerning the Esotar and Revelator are interesting to me because my speaker, Merlins VSM-SE has the Esotar, and his has the Revelator so I feel quite comfortable in offering my input. Our systems are very similar but our rooms are so different that it is hard to quantify the differences of the speakers. His room is very well damped and mine has a livelier sound. The Merlins without question have greater resolution, dynamics, image focus and wider soundstaging and a flat frequency response. The Montanas are very smooth and provide an upfront presentation of the music as do the Merlins, neither are laid-back. The Esotar provides phenomenal off axis dispersion, which really opens up the soundstage. Transient response is also much quicker than the Revelator is. I really don't feel that steely is necessarily a characteristic of the Esotar so long as the signal it is fed is up to its performance capabilities. In reality it is quite smooth, BUT if the signal is not of the highest level I can believe that it could impart a steely character as could the Revelator or any high-resolution driver for that matter. Another case for good electronics with a high resolution design. With my electronics I have not noticed this and neither has he. Timbres come across very naturally on good recordings, which is the most important criteria for any speaker system to me. I have many very good violin recordings both analog and digital where the air and tone of the instrument can positively make you believe you are listening to a real violin! He loves his Montana's but he is REALLY impressed with the smoothness, resolution and soundstaging of the Merlins. The Montana’s tonally are superb speakers which ultimately is the most important characteristic of any system. A different approach and two very different designs. Ultimately I like my Merlins with the Esotar better and if he were forced to pick between them I bet he would admit the same although he is quite satisfied with his set-up as he should be. In the near future he is planning on bringing his speakers to my place and then we will be able to quantify the differences in an identical environmental.