Have you seen the VR9SE Review?

Tim, thanks.

my previous speakers to the VR9's were the Kharma Exquisites which were a prime example of simple signal path. they had a very simple 'serial' crossover and the mid-range ran free. when i had compared the Kharmas to most anything they had that mid-range clarity and open naturalness that was so important to me.

when i initially looked at the VR9's i had a similar reaction as you.....why would i want all that 'stuff' in the signal path? then i heard them at CES back to back with Kharmas and clearly i was hearing as far (maybe farther) into the music as the Kharmas. i can tell you that as clear, open and uncolored as the Kharmas are the VR9's are another level or two beyond that.

the key is in the execution and component choices not in the overall circut scheme. all things being equal simpler is cleaner....but all things are not equal. Von Schweikert choose some very expensive autoformers (over $500 each x 3 for each speaker) for attenuation for the tweeters and similar for the woofer. these autoformers maintain the same impedence at all positions. from my conversations with Von Schweikert these components were transparent in the signal path thru the design stage.

the proof is in the listening. every time i listen i find it hard to believe i am listening to a 6-way 7 driver speaker with 4 attenuators.....but i am.

as far as ANY digital crossover i have NEVER heard one that is transparent.....and if you can do the room and speaker correctly they have no purpose. i will never dumb down my sources by digitizing (or re-digitizing) them.

Looks like the VR9's are gonna be collector's items, huh?

Tim916, Lake contour would be excellent, it will not skew anything as long as you have a preamp that feeds it correctly and with the right tone in the first place.. I have done some near Cost no object crossovers, and then now since the last few years things like the DBX PA and your mentioned lake contour, PARC or any of this type of digital correction has become available at resonable cost, electronic proves superior with good cables and tuning over any Passive devices, not to mention you can simply make things happen and have infinate adjustments vs. a standard passive built crossover with a couple level knobs on it. Just in my experience. Passive always seems to still soak up something more, electronic normally will pass with no power loss and have the capability to even boost it without added color or distortion if its a good unit.

Thanks, Mike, for that great essay ;-)

Some of us 'normal' people wonder how one comes up with (or borrows!) the $250K or so to spend on a room/speakers/source material? ;-) It's amazing how much wealth is out there, despite people saying, "the economy sucks"...

Best,
-greg

Though I have no doubts as to the fine performance of the VR9SE(I was amazed as to how good they sound in a small room),the comparison as to clarity,compared to the wonderful Kharma EXQ REF cannot be made to the degree stated here.Sorry!!Even by the owner of both systems!Because components differed,and to be able to discern being able to hear deeper into one design,the VR9 over the Kharma,would simply have to be made in a side by side comparison,with exact supporting componentry.I'm kind of suspicious as to the "emotional factor",which was most probably at play here.It's normal.
We are all guilty of this,a bit,and it is human nature.After all,how many of us have spent big bucks to upgrade componentry(sucessfully),and then did NOT want to reinforce a favorable observation.Big or small!
Was the Kharma in as perfect a "room match" as the VR9SE?Wasn't that the reason for moving to the VR9?It mated better to the larger listening space.No?That's how I interpreted the change.
Please understand,I mean no disrespect,but my own "audio pal's" do this all the time.

Best!