Hi All,
The Keltiks and now the majik 140's have gone! The core system remains the same Akurate DS/Kisto/ 2 Solos.
For the first time in about 20 years a pair on Non Linn speakers are on the way. Shahinian Obelisks(about 4 years old)
I can find lots of info. on Obelisks with Naim, Bryston, Dynavector amps but nothing much when linked with Linn. I did speak to John at Pear Audio UK, and he felt sure the solos would be fine/very good because solos are great amps!
Now shahinians generally seem to evoke love or hate comments and nothing in between. Genuinely dont mind if you hate them, but I just wondered if anyone on the forum had any direct experience of Linn gear used with any of the Shahinian range?
Advice from friends is to listen for about a month to get used to a very different presentation. For those who find they work there seems to be many positive comments such as "musically beguilling"!!
Time will tell.
Thanks.
Steve.
shahinians and Linn.
Moderator: Staff
Hi,
I used Shahinian Arc's with Linn amps for about 8 years. Starting with an LK280 and eventually a Klimax Twin. I demo'd them at a Linn dealer when I bought them and I thought they went together very well. I listened to many things at the time, but the Shahinians won.
I think they are great, very rhythmic and fill the room with engaging sound. The Arc's rhythm is great although they can be a bit laid back at times, I've heard the Obelisks are much better in this aspect, although I've not had the chance to hear them.
I moved to 242's, which really miss some of the fun and presence of the Arc's. It's actually taking me longer to get used to the 242's than I expected and I'll move on more quickly than the many years I spent with the Arc's.
I still have them, I may get around to selling them soon, but something makes me keep them....
John
I used Shahinian Arc's with Linn amps for about 8 years. Starting with an LK280 and eventually a Klimax Twin. I demo'd them at a Linn dealer when I bought them and I thought they went together very well. I listened to many things at the time, but the Shahinians won.
I think they are great, very rhythmic and fill the room with engaging sound. The Arc's rhythm is great although they can be a bit laid back at times, I've heard the Obelisks are much better in this aspect, although I've not had the chance to hear them.
I moved to 242's, which really miss some of the fun and presence of the Arc's. It's actually taking me longer to get used to the 242's than I expected and I'll move on more quickly than the many years I spent with the Arc's.
I still have them, I may get around to selling them soon, but something makes me keep them....
John
Hi John,
Thanks for the response, and the promising reassurance! Ive had 242's in the past, and again had a recent extended listen at a dem evening. They were fully acive with 5100's, when I had them they were active with 200's. Listening again convinced me to try something else - hence the shahinians.
What is it do you think that brings, from some, such negative comments toward shahinians? You lived with the arcs for a lot of years, can I ask what prompted a move away, rather than a move to Hawks or Diapasons? Diapasons I have seen c£5k second hand which compares with 242's new price.
cheers
Steve.
Thanks for the response, and the promising reassurance! Ive had 242's in the past, and again had a recent extended listen at a dem evening. They were fully acive with 5100's, when I had them they were active with 200's. Listening again convinced me to try something else - hence the shahinians.
What is it do you think that brings, from some, such negative comments toward shahinians? You lived with the arcs for a lot of years, can I ask what prompted a move away, rather than a move to Hawks or Diapasons? Diapasons I have seen c£5k second hand which compares with 242's new price.
cheers
Steve.
Hello Steve
I have listened to the Obelisks some years ago. I can't remember with which make of electronics they played. I liked them a lot but I had the impression that they are mainly for orchestral music and I think that they need a very good room to perform well.
I have a question myself. You moved from Kletiks to Akurate 242 and then to Majik 140. Is that correct? I have Kabers and I'm thinking about getting a pair of 140s or save for a pair of 242s. How was the difference between the Keltiks and the Majik 140? Is it an improvement? And what about the 242s compared with the Keltiks?
Regads
Paul
I have listened to the Obelisks some years ago. I can't remember with which make of electronics they played. I liked them a lot but I had the impression that they are mainly for orchestral music and I think that they need a very good room to perform well.
I have a question myself. You moved from Kletiks to Akurate 242 and then to Majik 140. Is that correct? I have Kabers and I'm thinking about getting a pair of 140s or save for a pair of 242s. How was the difference between the Keltiks and the Majik 140? Is it an improvement? And what about the 242s compared with the Keltiks?
Regads
Paul
Hi Paul,
Ill do my best to describe the differences, but one of the difficulties is that the "core" gear was different.
If I start with Keltiks to 140's. The good thing being that my mate now has my previous Keltik set up, so before I got rid of the 140's I was fairly regularly hearing both. In terms of tune dem(as I understand the term) the 140's with solos win. However, the Keltiks with the Klimax crossovers fully active with 4200's make you really "feel" the music, not least because of the 2 driven isobarik drivers. The Keltiks also have a very warm/mellow presentation.
The 140's on the other hand are much more Linns recent dry, accurate and clean sound. Driven with the solos their performance for cost is excellent. The sale of the Keltik system gave me this opportunity to try a "better" passive system compared to a lot of years of active only. Other threads have covered such comparisons.
My best description of the 242's is more of the same. To be fair when I had the 242's I was using the Exotik DA(Akurate Kontrol) and majik cd. Having heard them at the recent dem with Akurate DS/Akurate kontrol and 5100's, the thing it did clearly show me was that the "200's" are way more capable than the "100's"(something to bear in mind for future planning?) Anyway, the point was that still this dry, playing exactly what was there sound was evident.The 242's definately present vocals better than the 140's, and it is easier to follow both the bass line and the depth of bass more easily. As they should at around 5 time the cost. While I feel sure that the Kisto would further enhance their performance the dem convinced me to look elsewhere, at least for a while.
I guess what Im saying is that for me the newer Linn speaker sound is too clinical and clean. The Keltiks arent, and maybe thats why for me its time to try something else!
I only tried the 140's passive Paul, as always Im sure active operation especially as they are a true 4 way speaker would be very interesting!
As always, if time and opportunity allows spend a day at a really good "interested" dealer. If he is good, all possible combinations will be presented - ENJOY!
Sorry if this doesnt help very much, but I find its much more about how I "feel" about what Im hearing, and I do find difficulty putting that into words.
Steve.
Ill do my best to describe the differences, but one of the difficulties is that the "core" gear was different.
If I start with Keltiks to 140's. The good thing being that my mate now has my previous Keltik set up, so before I got rid of the 140's I was fairly regularly hearing both. In terms of tune dem(as I understand the term) the 140's with solos win. However, the Keltiks with the Klimax crossovers fully active with 4200's make you really "feel" the music, not least because of the 2 driven isobarik drivers. The Keltiks also have a very warm/mellow presentation.
The 140's on the other hand are much more Linns recent dry, accurate and clean sound. Driven with the solos their performance for cost is excellent. The sale of the Keltik system gave me this opportunity to try a "better" passive system compared to a lot of years of active only. Other threads have covered such comparisons.
My best description of the 242's is more of the same. To be fair when I had the 242's I was using the Exotik DA(Akurate Kontrol) and majik cd. Having heard them at the recent dem with Akurate DS/Akurate kontrol and 5100's, the thing it did clearly show me was that the "200's" are way more capable than the "100's"(something to bear in mind for future planning?) Anyway, the point was that still this dry, playing exactly what was there sound was evident.The 242's definately present vocals better than the 140's, and it is easier to follow both the bass line and the depth of bass more easily. As they should at around 5 time the cost. While I feel sure that the Kisto would further enhance their performance the dem convinced me to look elsewhere, at least for a while.
I guess what Im saying is that for me the newer Linn speaker sound is too clinical and clean. The Keltiks arent, and maybe thats why for me its time to try something else!
I only tried the 140's passive Paul, as always Im sure active operation especially as they are a true 4 way speaker would be very interesting!
As always, if time and opportunity allows spend a day at a really good "interested" dealer. If he is good, all possible combinations will be presented - ENJOY!
Sorry if this doesnt help very much, but I find its much more about how I "feel" about what Im hearing, and I do find difficulty putting that into words.
Steve.
-
Music Lover
- Very active member
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
- Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil
What are you looking for and what are your present source/pre/power amps?Paulinko wrote:I have Kabers and I'm thinking about getting a pair of 140s or save for a pair of 242s.
Sound and details --> 242 as they are a lot more exact than both 140 and Keltik.
If you want same presentation as your Kaber but just better - i.e. more details, better bass, more power --> Keltik.
It's all about musical understanding!
Hello Steve
<Sorry if this doesnt help very much, but I find its much more about how I <"feel" about what I'm hearing, and I do find difficulty putting that into <words.
Thanks for your thoughts, it helps me quite lot. I think I'll have to listen to the 140s at home. My dealer also suggested to change the last generation tweeters of my Kabers and intsall the Ninka tweeters. (Sometimes the highs seem too harsh for me.)
Regards
Paul
<Sorry if this doesnt help very much, but I find its much more about how I <"feel" about what I'm hearing, and I do find difficulty putting that into <words.
Thanks for your thoughts, it helps me quite lot. I think I'll have to listen to the 140s at home. My dealer also suggested to change the last generation tweeters of my Kabers and intsall the Ninka tweeters. (Sometimes the highs seem too harsh for me.)
Regards
Paul
Hello Music Lover
Apart from getting "closer to the music" I would like a speaker that is smoother/sweeter in the high frequencies. Some time ago I installed the last generation tweeters in the Kabers. As I'm not a professional I probably didn't do the soldering job well enough so the highs are a bit too harsh/edgy on some records. Maybe I'll change to the Ninka-tweeters and have my dealer do the soldering.
In the long run I'll probably change to the Majik 140 instead of 242 and invest in another Chakra Twin secondhand. Within the next myears I can add two more Twins an later go active.
Regards
Paul
My system is "MacikCD/LP 12/Ekos/Akiva/Linto/Klimax Kontrol/Klimax Chakra Twin/Kaber passive".Music Lover wrote: What are you looking for and what are your present source/pre/power amps?
Apart from getting "closer to the music" I would like a speaker that is smoother/sweeter in the high frequencies. Some time ago I installed the last generation tweeters in the Kabers. As I'm not a professional I probably didn't do the soldering job well enough so the highs are a bit too harsh/edgy on some records. Maybe I'll change to the Ninka-tweeters and have my dealer do the soldering.
In the long run I'll probably change to the Majik 140 instead of 242 and invest in another Chakra Twin secondhand. Within the next myears I can add two more Twins an later go active.
Regards
Paul
-
Music Lover
- Very active member
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
- Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil
Then you need a Klimax filter.Paulinko wrote:Within the next myears I can add two more Twins an later go active.
Klimax filter/4*Twin/140 is a nice source first approach :mrgreen: Great idea but just checking...you know that the Xovers are VERY expensive, correct?
It's all about musical understanding!
-
Music Lover
- Very active member
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
- Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil
Yes, and I believe Linn call them "Ninka treble 038/2".poppop wrote: Certainly worth trying what Linn now seem to refer to as their " new metal faceplate treble for all loudspeakers" Isnt very expensive - stuck them in the Keltiks and thought it was better.
Tried all three different trebles units on Keltik (original, SPKR015) and 038/2 was the best.
It's all about musical understanding!
Hi Music Lover
Regards
Paul
They probably will be. As far as I know are they not available yet. But I think Linn would even manufacture a pair on request. If that's to expensive I can probably use a LK-style tunebox and have the filters installed in there. But these are dreams for the future.Music Lover wrote:you know that the Xovers are VERY expensive, correct?
Regards
Paul
Hi All,
Had the Obs for a couple of days. The choice was these or back to 242's.
Not the last word in Bass but keeping the 2 Melodiks well backed off is working well.
Took a while getting used to rolling them around on castors!! but Ive never heard a speaker retrieve so much detail and to echo Johns point regarding rhythm - I dont know how/why but the stones "start me up" seems to stir "Er" indoors into "Mick" impressions! Knew there would be a downside.
They do seem to soak up power, regularly seem to have the Kisto around 75 - 80 and although loud its not too crazy.
Certainly worth a listen. Throw the rule book about stability/solidity out the window, and then decide. I would almost describe them as the opposite of my previous 242's fully active with 4200's - and for that reason, proceed with caution!
Steve.
Had the Obs for a couple of days. The choice was these or back to 242's.
Not the last word in Bass but keeping the 2 Melodiks well backed off is working well.
Took a while getting used to rolling them around on castors!! but Ive never heard a speaker retrieve so much detail and to echo Johns point regarding rhythm - I dont know how/why but the stones "start me up" seems to stir "Er" indoors into "Mick" impressions! Knew there would be a downside.
They do seem to soak up power, regularly seem to have the Kisto around 75 - 80 and although loud its not too crazy.
Certainly worth a listen. Throw the rule book about stability/solidity out the window, and then decide. I would almost describe them as the opposite of my previous 242's fully active with 4200's - and for that reason, proceed with caution!
Steve.
Hi Fredrik,
You always ask the awkward questions! LOL.
Ill try and elaborate but maybe not very well! So far, and it may well be Im just in the first flush of trying something very different. There is of course the physical difference - I think the boxes the obelisks came in were heavier than the speakers!
Ill be checking with friends this weekend but the best "image" least boomy/plummy bass seems to come from toe out rather than toe in. Never experienced that before, and because of the 6 drivers on the pyramid top the sound stage is unaffected, and in some ways better due to the reflection angles with the wall I guess.
One of my favourite ripped cd's for the past few months has been Leonard Cohens "10 New Songs".On "you have loved enough" - while the bass is certainly limited the diction/clarity and real emotion is, to my ears, better portrayed than at the recent dem of the 242's where I felt it was less clear, less easy to follow the words and much more importantly the emotion was less?
The stones "start me up" on the 242's sounded in many ways clearer, but not maybe as foot tappingly interesting as the obs??
I remember when down at Linn, the question asked when listening was always "better or worse". At the minute Im at "better" in a number of key areas. Dont know if John can elaborate further as he also seems to have some doubts about 242's and his 8 year old Arcs.
Certainly from the various web articles etc., all the Shahinians seem to illicit one of two reactions: "the only way to listen to music" to "they are a joke"
Have you heard Shahinians Fredrik?
Steve.
You always ask the awkward questions! LOL.
Ill try and elaborate but maybe not very well! So far, and it may well be Im just in the first flush of trying something very different. There is of course the physical difference - I think the boxes the obelisks came in were heavier than the speakers!
Ill be checking with friends this weekend but the best "image" least boomy/plummy bass seems to come from toe out rather than toe in. Never experienced that before, and because of the 6 drivers on the pyramid top the sound stage is unaffected, and in some ways better due to the reflection angles with the wall I guess.
One of my favourite ripped cd's for the past few months has been Leonard Cohens "10 New Songs".On "you have loved enough" - while the bass is certainly limited the diction/clarity and real emotion is, to my ears, better portrayed than at the recent dem of the 242's where I felt it was less clear, less easy to follow the words and much more importantly the emotion was less?
The stones "start me up" on the 242's sounded in many ways clearer, but not maybe as foot tappingly interesting as the obs??
I remember when down at Linn, the question asked when listening was always "better or worse". At the minute Im at "better" in a number of key areas. Dont know if John can elaborate further as he also seems to have some doubts about 242's and his 8 year old Arcs.
Certainly from the various web articles etc., all the Shahinians seem to illicit one of two reactions: "the only way to listen to music" to "they are a joke"
Have you heard Shahinians Fredrik?
Steve.
Maybe in a slightly less agressive way the Keltiks seem to illicit a similar response - from the "best" to the "worst" speaker Linn ever made!
However, given such a range of variables its maybe understandable. Even at the dem I attended. The room was about 4 times the size of my listening room. Id never heard 242's active with 5100's and pre was Akurate Kontrol.
The only "common" piece of gear was the Akurate DS!!
Just shows how important it is to listen in your own environment - but of course, not always possible because of location.
Steve.
However, given such a range of variables its maybe understandable. Even at the dem I attended. The room was about 4 times the size of my listening room. Id never heard 242's active with 5100's and pre was Akurate Kontrol.
The only "common" piece of gear was the Akurate DS!!
Just shows how important it is to listen in your own environment - but of course, not always possible because of location.
Steve.
Hi Steve,
Sorry for the slight delay in responding.
Your first question about why I moved away from Shahinian is a bit difficult to answer... I guess after 8 years I was in upgrade mood, and all the rest of my kit was Linn, and I bought ex-dem. It's not so easy to listen when you're buying like that, my main chance was at a DS demo evening where they sounded nice. So I just gave it a go, with a bit of 'brand-trust', which is probably the wrong way to do it but I think I'm not alone doing that!
They are very different, I do find the 242's on good tracks to be good - very detailed, rythmic, impressive. However I also get a bit bored, they don't quite draw me in, I find myself concentrating rather than just enjoying. They also rip poorly recorded material to pieces. I want to be at the concert, and the 242's take me somewhere more analytical.
The Shahinians are strange and that draws attention, Oblisks have castors, and Arc's have rubber feet and a fuse, yes, rubber feet (I short circuited the fuse, although it didn't change much). They seem to go against such well established principles, throwing the rule book out. Surely they can't be taken seriously?
But they almost always got my foot tapping, they sometimes sent shivers down my spine, and I just relaxed into the music, it was engaging. Where the 242's were almost clinical, the Arc's were intimate. I really liked them even though they were maybe a bit uncontrolled or colored in the bass. I remember coming back from a hi-fi show, sitting down to my system and thinking it had something that all the others lacked.
I've had them unplugged for a couple of months now, I may try again, especially as the K-DS has arrived. I wish the 242's has castors to move them...
I've heard from a dealer that the Obelisks are the best of the range, that the more exotic variants are less interesting, but that was hearsay.
I'm in of those upgrade cycles at the moment - in the course of a few years from Ikemi, Exotik, Twin, Shahinian to KDS, KK, K-Twin (solos's soon) and 242's. I'm wondering where to go from the 242's, I think I'm going to have a good listen to several things before I jump again - Shahinian's included!
Out of curiosity, has anyone heard the new 350 passive yet?
john
Sorry for the slight delay in responding.
Your first question about why I moved away from Shahinian is a bit difficult to answer... I guess after 8 years I was in upgrade mood, and all the rest of my kit was Linn, and I bought ex-dem. It's not so easy to listen when you're buying like that, my main chance was at a DS demo evening where they sounded nice. So I just gave it a go, with a bit of 'brand-trust', which is probably the wrong way to do it but I think I'm not alone doing that!
They are very different, I do find the 242's on good tracks to be good - very detailed, rythmic, impressive. However I also get a bit bored, they don't quite draw me in, I find myself concentrating rather than just enjoying. They also rip poorly recorded material to pieces. I want to be at the concert, and the 242's take me somewhere more analytical.
The Shahinians are strange and that draws attention, Oblisks have castors, and Arc's have rubber feet and a fuse, yes, rubber feet (I short circuited the fuse, although it didn't change much). They seem to go against such well established principles, throwing the rule book out. Surely they can't be taken seriously?
But they almost always got my foot tapping, they sometimes sent shivers down my spine, and I just relaxed into the music, it was engaging. Where the 242's were almost clinical, the Arc's were intimate. I really liked them even though they were maybe a bit uncontrolled or colored in the bass. I remember coming back from a hi-fi show, sitting down to my system and thinking it had something that all the others lacked.
I've had them unplugged for a couple of months now, I may try again, especially as the K-DS has arrived. I wish the 242's has castors to move them...
I've heard from a dealer that the Obelisks are the best of the range, that the more exotic variants are less interesting, but that was hearsay.
I'm in of those upgrade cycles at the moment - in the course of a few years from Ikemi, Exotik, Twin, Shahinian to KDS, KK, K-Twin (solos's soon) and 242's. I'm wondering where to go from the 242's, I think I'm going to have a good listen to several things before I jump again - Shahinian's included!
Out of curiosity, has anyone heard the new 350 passive yet?
john
Thanks John,
Thats really mirroring what I was trying to say in my post above. Its nice when someone confirms what you believe you are hearing! LOL.
I would agree there are things, like the bass, where I would say they arent great. BUT somehow they have this engaging effect. Im now revisiting some of the old Runrigg stuff because of both the rhythmical ability, and also their ability to portray vocals in a magical way.
So yes, the whole is greater than the parts.
I have also tried putting them on top of Isobarik stands(they fit just about!) because it seems wrong that they can almost "wobble" on the castors. While it gave a much tighter and focused presentaion - something was lost. They are now back on the castors!
Very interested in what you say about the Hawks and Diapasons. As I must say during my short time with the Obs, the thought of the Diapasons and another 2 solos, bi amped, seemd like the next obvious move!.
Be interesting to hear where you evetually decide to spend the money?
Steve.
Thats really mirroring what I was trying to say in my post above. Its nice when someone confirms what you believe you are hearing! LOL.
I would agree there are things, like the bass, where I would say they arent great. BUT somehow they have this engaging effect. Im now revisiting some of the old Runrigg stuff because of both the rhythmical ability, and also their ability to portray vocals in a magical way.
So yes, the whole is greater than the parts.
I have also tried putting them on top of Isobarik stands(they fit just about!) because it seems wrong that they can almost "wobble" on the castors. While it gave a much tighter and focused presentaion - something was lost. They are now back on the castors!
Very interested in what you say about the Hawks and Diapasons. As I must say during my short time with the Obs, the thought of the Diapasons and another 2 solos, bi amped, seemd like the next obvious move!.
Be interesting to hear where you evetually decide to spend the money?
Steve.