Dynaudio Audience vs. Contour

Dan,

You may have answered your own qustion. If you prefer the A52 after carefully auditioning both, go for the A52. Pocket the money saved and buy music, movies and/or ???.

The Contours are a more detailed speaker (D260 vs D28-2 tweeter) which you may or not prefer. The MKII also has quite a bit of a low end advantage over the A52 but if using a sub, that shouldn't be much of an issue.

One last thing since you mentioned HT. The Audience center costs quite a bit less than the Contour which may be of consideration. Dynaudio indicated to me the the new C center would run approx. $2.0-$2.5K (Yikes!). The other option would be to find the old model Contour in the used market.

Regards,

Jet

I am facing the same decision myself. I ended up buying a new pair of Dyanudio Audience 52 with maple finish when the local dealer had a sale. The problem with Contours 1.3 Mk2 is that it will require more amp power to sound good. This will end up costing way too much in the ever costly upgrade path. I believe system synergy is more important than any single one componet in the chain.

They are currently in the bedroom system being broken in right now.

Jet also had a good point about going into a home theater system later. There is no small Contour speaker that has front port design. That makes them difficult to ceiling mount in the rear.

Unfortunately, I have not specifically heard the 1.3mk2, since it has been discontinued. Hence the reason for the post. I have heard some of the other contours, and I like the better high end definition. However, I thought the tonal balance was better on the 52s... As I recall, the contour high bass seemed a little prominent.

I will be running the speakers off of a Rotel 1055 receiver (75w/ch conservative) which is a high current receiver. I think it is supposed to be a good match for either the Audience or Contours, but If you think otherwise, please let me know.

I also already have the T2.1 Contour center, which should blend fine for both. I am also using a REL Q100 sub.

I guess my big question is do YOU think the Contour 1.3 mk2 sounds better than the 52s...and do YOU think there is a problem with tonal balance on the 1.3s.

THANKS.

Dan

Dan - I would much prefer the 1.3 mk2's taken as an issue by itself. That said, I think you'll find the 52's a better match for the Rotel. That's a nice receiver, but the discontinued Contour's (such as the 1.3's) REALLY soak up the current. Unless you're planning on upgrading the receiver in the fairly near future, I think you'll like the 52's better.

I do like the sound of the 1.3's better than the 52's and, no, I don't think there is a tonal balance problem. -Kirk

Thanks for your opinion on the 1.3mk2 Kirk. I look forward to hearing more opinions on them. I hope they really are a step up from the 52s, which I like a lot. By the way, have you heard the new Contour lineup? Are they really much improved, as advertised?

As far as the amp goes, I think the Rotel 1055 is supposed to be able to handle the contour 1.3mk2... they were paired together at the local HiFi store, and sounded very nice. The 75w/ch Rotel is a conservative rating, outguning other receivers (Sony, Denon, Onkyo, Marantz) rated over 125W/Ch. Reviews have mentioned that the unit performs similarly to separates, which has been their selling point. If anyone else has specific experience on the matter, I would love to hear it!

Thanks.

Dan