Focal Kanta No.2

@mmeysarosh 
My room is on the smaller size of average I'd say. It's about the smallest space Focal recommends for 936's. I made that choice quite deliberately because you're virtually always going to end up with better bass reproduction from 2 sources instead of 4. If I hadn't considered that a significant problem I'd have bought 1008 Be's and augmented them with subs. I'm well aware of the EM drivers. That technology is far to expensive to apply to $10,000 speakers. That's why they use NIC motors to increase the linearity of the motor over long excursions.

I'm not trying to pick on you specifically. You made a statement that gets tossed around here a lot based on what appears to be a misunderstanding of what a low point measurement is. 

@stereo5 
I do think the big GE's are more voiced for HT use. Movie soundtracks aren't as disrupted by insanely overblown bass like the big GE's are prone to from one music track to another. Their voicing strikes me as hyper-real while being polite and clinical with weaker image depth. They lacked something Focal brings to the table. 

There have been a few mentions here of a new and bigger Kanta No.3 coming soon, yet I’ve seen no info to that extent even from Focal when I inquired. Since I would likely be all in if this were the case, I’m wondering if the anticipation for such is from a verifiable source rather than just a `wish for’ possibility?

@stereo5 
No dung being flung, many speakers aren't agreeable to wide number of listeners, otherwise no choices would exist perfect sound would be replicated by the worlds only loud speaker manufacture.

Also, let it be known that non should have an opinion that differs than your own and acute hearing leaves us only dreaming of sound that only your gifted self can experience. This last sentence being a true representation of horse dung.

A good number of people who feel that way about GE products and others that only exude praise for them. But what I can say is the the Triton One had pretty notable treble flair starting at the upper mid to lower treble transition. The also have a an elevated upper treble to compensate for dispersion loss at 10khz and above. It also displays some vertical dispersion changes. Not to mention the mid driver has been measured to have an appreciable amount of distortion in nearly all of its operating range. Not a benchmark performance, even at some of its given prices.

So their difficult to setup well, do not have as clean a reproduction of critical ranges, and have driver linearity issues at the tweeter. Now they have recently improved the distortion figures in the plus series and further improved the dispersion characteristics in their reference series. In listening, imaging is wide but depth is somewhat shortened compared to others. 

I've heard the Vandy Quartro Wood and not my cup of tea, but certainly not bad at all. Neither is the GE line for what I would say overzealous upper end response, but it has improved over recent versions which I admittedly haven't heard.

In any case, your response is silly, pointless, and expressed with glaring lack of tact in expression and so noted for future futile responses.

In room bass response is quite dependent on well, the room! When any speaker has less overall space from its boundaries, the overall energy dissipated moving through the air is reduced. It returns to you from the boundary at a greater level than what would have in a larger room, not to mention the volume of air.

With that, bass preferences will certainly be room dependent as larger more extended speaker could easily overload a smaller room.

In any respect, I do prefer what Focal chose to do with their bass drivers. They do have useful output int he lower mids and I always prefer if we keep them working cleanly in their range.