I am trying to decide between these speakers for my entry-level Denon
1603 - initially for stereo use, bt perhaps later as fronts or rears.
I have auditioned all three - the KEFs and B&Ws at the same store and
the Tannoys at another store. The acoustics of the two stores were
drastically diffrent so I feel my judgement is lacking. The Tannoys
very good, but appear small. They are much cheaper too - nearly half
the price of the others. Between the KEF Q1 and the B&W 601 S3 the B&W
sounded much neater and true but the sound changed as the bass got
high - what I mean by that is that when the bass suddenly gets high,
musically, it loses continuity (only a bit). The KEFs sounded a bit
bright and not so true but they handled the bass much better - the
musical effect was very smooth over an entire song.

Going by the music I listen to, the B&Ws sounded better - for stuff
like acoustic music / alt rock. I'd probably prefer them over the
KEFs.

The Tannoys were good all around but I cannot compare them to the
B&Ws. I could not notice any problems with the spekers except their
small size. I assume the B&W are more ruggedly built (?) with metal
dome and kevlar cone vs paper and ceramic for the Tannoys. The
Tannoys, however, sounded better for stereo - I am only guessing but
they seem designed for stero whereas the B&Ws seems better for a HT
setup - the frequency response in the low end is quite different.

I also doubt that the Denon 1603 is perhaps not enough to power the
Tannoys.

I don't want to go wrong with the speakers and would appreciate any
advice on the above three.

Puneet Tanwar wrote:

I am trying to decide between these speakers for my entry-level Denon
1603 - initially for stereo use, bt perhaps later as fronts or rears.
I have auditioned all three - the KEFs and B&Ws at the same store and
the Tannoys at another store. The acoustics of the two stores were
drastically diffrent so I feel my judgement is lacking. The Tannoys
very good, but appear small. They are much cheaper too - nearly half
the price of the others. Between the KEF Q1 and the B&W 601 S3 the B&W
sounded much neater and true but the sound changed as the bass got
high - what I mean by that is that when the bass suddenly gets high,
musically, it loses continuity (only a bit). The KEFs sounded a bit
bright and not so true but they handled the bass much better - the
musical effect was very smooth over an entire song.

Yep. Kefs are better on bass. The B&W 601 - it sounds thin. The 602
is much better, IMO.

The Tannoys were good all around but I cannot compare them to the
B&Ws. I could not notice any problems with the spekers except their
small size.

That's a pretty fair assessment, IMO. The MX series are very
competant all-around, if a bit plain. Still, they are good
budget choices.

If you have enough money to buy the more expensive speakers,
consider upgrading to the Tannoy towers. Bass problems
fixed. I've seen MXm3s for not a lot more than the R1s.

P.S. space a real concern? The R1s are very good small speakers,
though a bit pricey.

I assume the B&W are more ruggedly built (?) with metal
dome and kevlar cone vs paper and ceramic for the Tannoys. The
Tannoys, however, sounded better for stereo - I am only guessing but
they seem designed for stero whereas the B&Ws seems better for a HT
setup - the frequency response in the low end is quite different.

Yep. OTOH, both will do just fine unless you thrash them.
OPne thing to note, though - truly good music speakers will whomp
all over HT type setups as movies ARE music in essence.

The rest - a sub will deal with the effects.

I also doubt that the Denon 1603 is perhaps not enough to power the
Tannoys.

All three are easy to drive with a 1603, though I'd honestly
look at the Outlaw Audio receiver instead - it's a better
upgrade for not a lot more money.

Joseph Oberlander wrote in message link.net...
Puneet Tanwar wrote:

I am trying to decide between these speakers for my entry-level Denon

Yep. Kefs are better on bass. The B&W 601 - it sounds thin. The 602
is much better, IMO.

The Tannoys were good all around but I cannot compare them to the

That's a pretty fair assessment, IMO. The MX series are very
competant all-around, if a bit plain. Still, they are good
budget choices.

If you have enough money to buy the more expensive speakers,
consider upgrading to the Tannoy towers. Bass problems
fixed. I've seen MXm3s for not a lot more than the R1s.

P.S. space a real concern? The R1s are very good small speakers,
though a bit pricey.

Tannoys, however, sounded better for stereo - I am only guessing but
they seem designed for stero whereas the B&Ws seems better for a HT
setup - the frequency response in the low end is quite different.

Yep. OTOH, both will do just fine unless you thrash them.
OPne thing to note, though - truly good music speakers will whomp
all over HT type setups as movies ARE music in essence.

The rest - a sub will deal with the effects.

B&W 601S3 + a matching sub sounds about right to me - would shift my
budget a bit but should be overall a bit better setup than MX2s plus
sub. I'm buying an MX2 as a gift for my brother, though - he seems to
prefer them over the 601s but below the 602s for some reasons of his
own (which I would not question as he's a professional audiophile - a
big reason I do not trust his judgement for my own purchases, he just
kills me with all the tech jargon).

I'd be happy with 601s, but to find out if they can be beaten at the
price (£200), I have also decided to audition the Monitor Audio Bronze
2 - a bit cheaper and seem to have a good frequency response. The MAs
are easier to drive too. I like the specs a LOT - lets see how they
sound. I read one review where they were mentioned as 'B&W-killers'.
Anyone that owned both of them? The audition is tomorrow - will post
the decision and the reasons.

(Puneet Tanwar) wrote in message
I'd be happy with 601s, but to find out if they can be beaten at the
price (£200), I have also decided to audition the Monitor Audio Bronze
2 - a bit cheaper and seem to have a good frequency response. The MAs
are easier to drive too. I like the specs a LOT - lets see how they
sound. I read one review where they were mentioned as 'B&W-killers'.
Anyone that owned both of them? The audition is tomorrow - will post
the decision and the reasons.

I went for the Monitor Audio Bronze B2. The 601s seemed to have some
negatives, the B2s had none. I spent over 1 hr listening to the two.
Heard the B2s first (the amp + cd separates were Rotel, 35 wpc); after
hearing the 601s for about 20 min, I went back to the B2s and never
felt like switching back. To my ears, the B2s had much more life and I
daresay I'd have gotten tired of the 601s if I played them for long in
one sitting because of the lack of a wholesome sound. B2 were
distinctly better as stero speakers for my tastes. Cost about the same
- £10 less than the 601s. I can imagine purists prefering the 601s for
(say) a violin solo or stuff like that but I'd not be convinced about
their superiority in rock/pop music play.