Hi Fredrik,
Thanks, eagerly awaiting your comments.
...hope you´re not giving your conclusion away, are you?
212s for reality check (= land on earth again).
T1 unrealistically good...
;-)
Marco
Klångedang T1 - sensational loudspeakers!
Moderator: Staff
Review part two. My Klångedang T1's have been playing for seven weeks.
In short: These speakers are indeed sensationally good! Clearly more musical and fun than Linn Akurate 212 mk2.
It's been seven good weeks. About half way through this period of evaluation, I did some fine tuning of the T1's. Distance from the back wall ended up at 18 cm exactly. Straight, not angled. Distance apart became 155,8 cm. A bit more narrow than the 212's - but mind you, this is in MY room. These numbers don't mean anything in another room. Levelling the speakers with a spirit level also made quite a difference.
Then I played with speaker cable lengths: Anders who has designed them says the cables from amps to filters should be short, while the cables from filters to speakers can be longer. This turned out to be correct. From amps (during these seven weeks I have alternated between a pair of Tundra Mono's and a Tundra) to filter I tried 0.4, 2.0, 2.4 and 3.0 m K200. The shortest (0.4 m) was clearly best, so the two filter boxes should be positioned close to the power amps.
Optimal speaker cable length from filters to T1 is still under evaluation. So far my impression is that these are likely to be identical to the optimal length of K200/400/600 that I've been searching for a long time. The reason why it's taking a long time is that the evaluation process goes like this: I make two pairs in different lengths in the exact same way, at the same time. Then I play music with them for 3.5 months, after which the soldered joints stop varying in sound quality. I then evaluate which of the two lengths is best - after which I am ready for making the next pair. I could of course speed things up by making many cables at a time, but I'm not in a hurry and don't want to waste a lot of cable. At the moment, I suspect that the optimal length (of K200/400/600 - nothing else) is somewhere between 2.4 and 3.0 m, but I'll come back to this when I know the exact figure. It's worth mentioning, however, that the differences are much bigger than I expected! I recommend everyone to use lengths of at least 2.4 m. Below 2 m is simply not very pleasant to listen to, while long cables are less of a problem - they just sound gradually more dull with increased length.
Music has been varied over these weeks. I often have periods when I play one artist, composer or genre for days in a row, until I feel soaked in it and realise it's time for a change. There's been some electric pop days, some new wave days, some folk/country days, some classical days, some hiphop days and some heavy metal days. The T1's handle everything brilliantly. They have an ability to cut straight to the nerve of the song, to what's really important with it. They don't seem to impress people so much with their sound - I haven't gotten many "wow, those are niiice speakers". Instead, there's been quite a few "ooh, this song is great, what is it?" followed by spontaneous dance steps around the room. I've had much less of those steps with the 212's! The T1's really are incredibly FUN speakers, for all types of music.
As I mentioned two weeks ago, I needed a reality check before posting my final verdict. This was accomplished by bringing back the Akurate 212 mk2's, carefully positioning them and...
The last record I played before removing the T1's from the room was Daft Punk's Random Access Memories on LP. I've been spinning it since I received it last weekend and there's some brilliant disco in there, often difficult not to dance to. After I had switched back to 212 and tuned their position, I put Daft Punk on again. Being used to the groove of the T1's, I couldn't stop feeling as if the music now fell flat to the ground. I kept hearing lots of "pretty noise", sounds that didn't quite time up with each other. It felt messy and boring. And I kept thinking 'Where did the boogie go??' I tried turning the volume up and found another very marked difference from the T1's: While the T1's sound gradually more fun and physical (they have quite an impressive bass) the louder I play, the 212's just get gradually more flat and harsh on the ears.
This volume thing is a big difference! Once I had noticed it, I continued playing rather quiet on the 212's, similar to the way I do in late evenings. And the 212's certainly seem to prefer this. Their level of detail makes them articulate well and while they sound a tad split up between many drive units, they still hold together well. The T1's in this low level condition are more integrated, more homogenic, but also a bit shy. I long to turn them up a bit, because I know how fun that gets. With increasing volume they just seem more and more confident and authoritative. Turning up the 212's is disappointing in comparison, because they don't get physical and the drive units get harsher and appear to play less in harmony with one another. They seem to gradually shatter, while the T1's grow and focus.
Two scenes from today:
1: Klångedang T1 is playing Daft Punk, rather loud. My teenage daughter enters the room and happily dances around for about a minute. Then she gets self conscious and walks out.
2: One hour later, 212 is playing Daft Punk, as loud as before. Same teenage daughter enters the room. My wife, sitting beside me, says "Great music, huh?". Daughter shakes her head and says "No". Then walks out.
I am not claiming that sound quality made all the difference between 1 and 2 above, something else might have changed our daughter's mood. But it really was a massive difference between how the T1's delivered a happy disco ball party and the many fragmented sounds of the 212's that simply didn't gel into anything danceable. In comparison, that is. Please remember that I think the Akurate 212's are fantastic speakers. This puts some perspective on how the T1's perform!
I am incredibly impressed that Anders at Tonläget HiFi in Gothenburg has developed these speakers all by himself. Yes, his Harmonihyllan racks are incredibly good. But there's much more competition in the loudspeaker market. And to enter at this level is nothing but sensational. To really top it off, he has a policy and an impressive track record of offering low cost upgrades when he finds a way to improve his products.
In short: These speakers are indeed sensationally good! Clearly more musical and fun than Linn Akurate 212 mk2.
It's been seven good weeks. About half way through this period of evaluation, I did some fine tuning of the T1's. Distance from the back wall ended up at 18 cm exactly. Straight, not angled. Distance apart became 155,8 cm. A bit more narrow than the 212's - but mind you, this is in MY room. These numbers don't mean anything in another room. Levelling the speakers with a spirit level also made quite a difference.
Then I played with speaker cable lengths: Anders who has designed them says the cables from amps to filters should be short, while the cables from filters to speakers can be longer. This turned out to be correct. From amps (during these seven weeks I have alternated between a pair of Tundra Mono's and a Tundra) to filter I tried 0.4, 2.0, 2.4 and 3.0 m K200. The shortest (0.4 m) was clearly best, so the two filter boxes should be positioned close to the power amps.
Optimal speaker cable length from filters to T1 is still under evaluation. So far my impression is that these are likely to be identical to the optimal length of K200/400/600 that I've been searching for a long time. The reason why it's taking a long time is that the evaluation process goes like this: I make two pairs in different lengths in the exact same way, at the same time. Then I play music with them for 3.5 months, after which the soldered joints stop varying in sound quality. I then evaluate which of the two lengths is best - after which I am ready for making the next pair. I could of course speed things up by making many cables at a time, but I'm not in a hurry and don't want to waste a lot of cable. At the moment, I suspect that the optimal length (of K200/400/600 - nothing else) is somewhere between 2.4 and 3.0 m, but I'll come back to this when I know the exact figure. It's worth mentioning, however, that the differences are much bigger than I expected! I recommend everyone to use lengths of at least 2.4 m. Below 2 m is simply not very pleasant to listen to, while long cables are less of a problem - they just sound gradually more dull with increased length.
Music has been varied over these weeks. I often have periods when I play one artist, composer or genre for days in a row, until I feel soaked in it and realise it's time for a change. There's been some electric pop days, some new wave days, some folk/country days, some classical days, some hiphop days and some heavy metal days. The T1's handle everything brilliantly. They have an ability to cut straight to the nerve of the song, to what's really important with it. They don't seem to impress people so much with their sound - I haven't gotten many "wow, those are niiice speakers". Instead, there's been quite a few "ooh, this song is great, what is it?" followed by spontaneous dance steps around the room. I've had much less of those steps with the 212's! The T1's really are incredibly FUN speakers, for all types of music.
As I mentioned two weeks ago, I needed a reality check before posting my final verdict. This was accomplished by bringing back the Akurate 212 mk2's, carefully positioning them and...
The last record I played before removing the T1's from the room was Daft Punk's Random Access Memories on LP. I've been spinning it since I received it last weekend and there's some brilliant disco in there, often difficult not to dance to. After I had switched back to 212 and tuned their position, I put Daft Punk on again. Being used to the groove of the T1's, I couldn't stop feeling as if the music now fell flat to the ground. I kept hearing lots of "pretty noise", sounds that didn't quite time up with each other. It felt messy and boring. And I kept thinking 'Where did the boogie go??' I tried turning the volume up and found another very marked difference from the T1's: While the T1's sound gradually more fun and physical (they have quite an impressive bass) the louder I play, the 212's just get gradually more flat and harsh on the ears.
This volume thing is a big difference! Once I had noticed it, I continued playing rather quiet on the 212's, similar to the way I do in late evenings. And the 212's certainly seem to prefer this. Their level of detail makes them articulate well and while they sound a tad split up between many drive units, they still hold together well. The T1's in this low level condition are more integrated, more homogenic, but also a bit shy. I long to turn them up a bit, because I know how fun that gets. With increasing volume they just seem more and more confident and authoritative. Turning up the 212's is disappointing in comparison, because they don't get physical and the drive units get harsher and appear to play less in harmony with one another. They seem to gradually shatter, while the T1's grow and focus.
Two scenes from today:
1: Klångedang T1 is playing Daft Punk, rather loud. My teenage daughter enters the room and happily dances around for about a minute. Then she gets self conscious and walks out.
2: One hour later, 212 is playing Daft Punk, as loud as before. Same teenage daughter enters the room. My wife, sitting beside me, says "Great music, huh?". Daughter shakes her head and says "No". Then walks out.
I am not claiming that sound quality made all the difference between 1 and 2 above, something else might have changed our daughter's mood. But it really was a massive difference between how the T1's delivered a happy disco ball party and the many fragmented sounds of the 212's that simply didn't gel into anything danceable. In comparison, that is. Please remember that I think the Akurate 212's are fantastic speakers. This puts some perspective on how the T1's perform!
I am incredibly impressed that Anders at Tonläget HiFi in Gothenburg has developed these speakers all by himself. Yes, his Harmonihyllan racks are incredibly good. But there's much more competition in the loudspeaker market. And to enter at this level is nothing but sensational. To really top it off, he has a policy and an impressive track record of offering low cost upgrades when he finds a way to improve his products.
-
Music Lover
- Very active member
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
- Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil
Great review, thanks!
While testing the optimal speaker cable length, have you considered the internal speaker cable length&brand and X-over layout/complexity in different speakers?
Just curious...
While testing the optimal speaker cable length, have you considered the internal speaker cable length&brand and X-over layout/complexity in different speakers?
Just curious...
lejonklou wrote:At the moment, I suspect that the optimal length (of K200/400/600 - nothing else) is somewhere between 2.4 and 3.0 m, but I'll come back to this when I know the exact figure. It's worth mentioning, however, that the differences are much bigger than I expected! I recommend everyone to use lengths of at least 2.4 m. Below 2 m is simply not very pleasant to listen to, while long cables are less of a problem - they just sound gradually more dull with increased length.
It's all about musical understanding!
I have tested with different passive speakers (which have different interal speaker cables and crossovers): Akurate 212 and 242, Majik 109 and experimental speakers at the lab. It appears that the differences between lengths of K200/400/600 with optimally soldered Knekt bananas is the same in all cases. So my guess is that this product, Knekt-K200-Knekt, has qualities in itself and among those there's an optimal length.Music Lover wrote:While testing the optimal speaker cable length, have you considered the internal speaker cable length&brand and X-over layout/complexity in different speakers?
It's interesting why this length (2.4 m is currently the best sounding pair I have, but this number might rise) doesn't work between power amp and the passive filter of Klångedang T1. That's where the cable length is evaluated with all other loudspeakers! Maybe it's due to the serial filter that is used, I don't know. It's just very clear that a short cable is superior at that point. Between the passive filter and T1, I have yet to find out whether 'my optimal length' applies and whether they are more or less sensitive to speaker length than other passive speakers.
The difference produced by different speaker lengths is surprisingly big when one gets close to the optimal length. It's like a peak in performance where the music feels just right. Shorter is increasingly harsher and staccato, longer is increasingly more fat, slow and dull.
Source: Mainly LP12 with Radikal/D, Keel, Ekos SE (latest model), old original T kable and Adikt. In addition some digital sources.mrco99 wrote:Could you maybe mention the setup being used, electonics, interlinks, speaker cable and possibly electricity boxes or filters?
Phono stage: Slipsik 5.1 in white (the one on the picture to the left!)
Preamp: Klimax Kontrol, original model
Power amps: Tundra 1.2 and Tundra Mono
Interconnects: Old original Linn Silver Analogue Interconnects and one pair of my own soldered Black Analogue Interconnects
Loudspeaker cable: Optimally soldered K200 with Knekt plugs.
Power cords: Volex Tongyuan 2.5 m Shuko model, direction with text
Distribution blocks: The unnamed best-ever blocks I managed to buy the last batch of and sold here on the forum a few years ago (they are marked with my logo). Sadly not available any more. Much better than anything else I've tried.
Racks: Quadraspire wallshelf (original model) for the LP12 and Harmonihyllan Mimer/Tor for the electronics.
The website mentions that the T1s work well on a bookcase with a lot of books * but poorly on a resonant frame with steel pipe, so it would appear to depend on the construction of your bookcase...PSive wrote:Do you think that they would work without stands? I currently have active 109s on the bookshelves in my study... would these work as eventual replacements (I thihk the 212s would be too big and heavy and these look a bit smaller)
"* When placed in the bookcase needed some air around to the base that comes out of the gate at the back to be heard optimally." (via Google Translate)
-
Rufus McDufus
- Active member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: 2012-04-28 07:56
I had mk1 212s on shelves and they were rather disappointing even considering the flexibility of adding/removing the bungs at the back. I found them better with some distance to the wall and I gather positioning is pretty critical with them to get the best out of them so having them on shelves really limits this possibility.
When I had keltiks I used 5m runs of k400. There was a trend to move amps nearer the speakers, and due to the fact kxo were in the system it was easier to move within a few inches of each spk. 1m lengths of k400 replaced the longer lengths, despite using the same tables, interconnects etc, to me it was nowhere near as musical.Spannko wrote:Lejonklou,
Re: Optimal speaker cable length, have you experimented with different amplifiers, or just your own design. Also, it's interesting that Naim used to recommend a minimum of 3.5m of cable too.
As I understand it the stands are a part of the design so the shelf used would likely affect the sound to a significant degree. However, as Fredrik mentions the stands offers a lot of damping to the speakers which I think they require (by design). It should be perfectly possible to try out a suitable amount of damping for the surface at hand, reaching a good result that way.PSive wrote:Do you think that they would work without stands? I currently have active 109s on the bookshelves in my study... would these work as eventual replacements (I thihk the 212s would be too big and heavy and these look a bit smaller)
Klånge - setup
Hi Fredrik and thanks for your trials and efforts.
I have K400 cable around 2,1 meters but the cable from amp to filter is a 1 m Tellurium Black. It sounds good to my ears but I have noticed due to the large nr of cables that dressing or organising them is essential.
At first I had them close to the wall around 10 cm and a bit toe in but upon your suggestion I moved them out and found that they opened up a bit more but then they loose a bit in the low end instead. I have them now at 17 cm out from the wall. Will try more , obviously it depends of the construction of the wall behind and also if the room is narrow or wide in listening position.
My next visit in Gothenburg at Tonläget will be time for upgrade the speaker, filter and stand to the latest version. Very excited about that one. I will also try to investigate more of the short cable, the one 40 cm long you have noticed to be best should be interesting to try out if I could borrow one from Anders perhaps?
Here is the picture of my system taken from Tonläget website. Amps are now changed to Teddy pardo pre and mono power.
http://www.klangedang.se/bilder/02.jpg
I have K400 cable around 2,1 meters but the cable from amp to filter is a 1 m Tellurium Black. It sounds good to my ears but I have noticed due to the large nr of cables that dressing or organising them is essential.
At first I had them close to the wall around 10 cm and a bit toe in but upon your suggestion I moved them out and found that they opened up a bit more but then they loose a bit in the low end instead. I have them now at 17 cm out from the wall. Will try more , obviously it depends of the construction of the wall behind and also if the room is narrow or wide in listening position.
My next visit in Gothenburg at Tonläget will be time for upgrade the speaker, filter and stand to the latest version. Very excited about that one. I will also try to investigate more of the short cable, the one 40 cm long you have noticed to be best should be interesting to try out if I could borrow one from Anders perhaps?
Here is the picture of my system taken from Tonläget website. Amps are now changed to Teddy pardo pre and mono power.
http://www.klangedang.se/bilder/02.jpg
Re: Klånge - setup
Magnuska,magnuska wrote:Amps are now changed to Teddy pardo pre and mono power.
did you compare Teddy Pardo Pre/Mono Power to Klimax Kontrol/Tundra (Mono) ?
KR
matthias
Re: Klånge - setup
No I can`t say I did that. I had the Tundra 1,1 on hometrial together with my Avondale preamp. That didn`t work so good. Sounded light and thin but detailed and fun.matthias wrote:Magnuska,magnuska wrote:Amps are now changed to Teddy pardo pre and mono power.
did you compare Teddy Pardo Pre/Mono Power to Klimax Kontrol/Tundra (Mono) ?
KR
matthias
The Teddy´s are powerful, detailed and very musical so I´m pleased.
Would be interesting to compare it to a Klimax control/Tundra
Very interesting report in a number of ways, thanks Fredrik. It certainly sounds like these are speakers to be reckoned with - wish I had the ability to hear them.
The cable length thing is very interesting. I definitely need to makeup a new set of cables as I'm sure I have yet to hear all the Tunrdas can do. The 3.5M length recommendation from Naim was a bit different in that their amps needed a certain loading from the cable or they could become unstable so that is why they recommended that minimum length. However, the idea of an optimum cable length is not new to me. Nordost has told us that there are optimum lengths for their cables and have provided some interesting information on their research on this. First off, they say that it appears to have more to do with the physical resonance characteristics of the cable rather than the electrical. Second, they have found the optimum length is slightly different for different models of their cables. Third, they have told us that the optimum length for virtually all their cables, whether AC, speaker or interconnects is a touch over 4 M. Because of it being a bit over 4M if you order a 4M cable from Nordost it will actually be a bit longer. If you order a 2M it will also be a bit longer (I believe half of the optimum length), etc. so none of the cables is an even length. While they make .6M interconnects they highly recommend against them and told us you really want to at least be at 2M for best performance. They mentioned stories of customers with several 2M cables of the same type who added in a 1M and wanted to know what was wrong with the cable because it didn't sound as good as the 2M ones so the differences are not supposed to be subtle.
Just thought that it was interesting that there are others who find optimum cable length to work. It also makes you wonder if there isn't a reason that Linn interconnects are 1.2M (especially considering it is half the 2.4M Fredrik is finding works well on the speaker cables).
The cable length thing is very interesting. I definitely need to makeup a new set of cables as I'm sure I have yet to hear all the Tunrdas can do. The 3.5M length recommendation from Naim was a bit different in that their amps needed a certain loading from the cable or they could become unstable so that is why they recommended that minimum length. However, the idea of an optimum cable length is not new to me. Nordost has told us that there are optimum lengths for their cables and have provided some interesting information on their research on this. First off, they say that it appears to have more to do with the physical resonance characteristics of the cable rather than the electrical. Second, they have found the optimum length is slightly different for different models of their cables. Third, they have told us that the optimum length for virtually all their cables, whether AC, speaker or interconnects is a touch over 4 M. Because of it being a bit over 4M if you order a 4M cable from Nordost it will actually be a bit longer. If you order a 2M it will also be a bit longer (I believe half of the optimum length), etc. so none of the cables is an even length. While they make .6M interconnects they highly recommend against them and told us you really want to at least be at 2M for best performance. They mentioned stories of customers with several 2M cables of the same type who added in a 1M and wanted to know what was wrong with the cable because it didn't sound as good as the 2M ones so the differences are not supposed to be subtle.
Just thought that it was interesting that there are others who find optimum cable length to work. It also makes you wonder if there isn't a reason that Linn interconnects are 1.2M (especially considering it is half the 2.4M Fredrik is finding works well on the speaker cables).
Yes, I also used to evaluate speaker cable lengths using a 2100/D (and before that with a 4200). The results then were the same as with my own power amps. Now I no longer have the Linn amps, so I will double check future comparisons on another system, to see whether it depends on the power amps used.Spannko wrote:Re: Optimal speaker cable length, have you experimented with different amplifiers, or just your own design. Also, it's interesting that Naim used to recommend a minimum of 3.5m of cable too.
I have now played some more on the 212's since I reinstalled them in the living room. I also did some tests on an electronic circuit I'm working on - which I previously found so much easier with 212 than with Majik 109 (which are forgiving in a way that covers up tiny faults).
After living with T1 I feel it's much easier to hear the strengths and weaknesses of 212. The 212's provide lots of information, they're sooo detailed and informative. The 3K arrays are truly high end in this department. I enjoyed a couple of J J Cale albums and similar to studio monitors, the 212 makes it very clear how each song is recorded. There's less of the heart that T1 provides, less emotion and worse timing. But the resolution in the upper frequency range is no doubt higher in 212.
I also noticed how the bass of 212 is quite damped. A tad too much, I'd say. Although it appears to go a bit deeper, it doesn't communicate the music as the T1's do. The bass of the T1's took a long time to break in, but after many weeks it arrived at a balance that feels spot on and very musical. The timing in particular is very impressive! The 212's appear to cut notes off just a bit too early and they also don't integrate the bass as well. Similar to the higher frequencies, many bass notes sound clean and exact, but don't communicate the way the T1's do.
Hi all!
I have been living with Klångedang T1 for about ten days now and would like to share my first impressions with you.
First some background: my listening room is about 35 square meters and leads into a corridor. The room usually tends to swallow quite a lot of bass. Rest of the system consists of a LS NAS, Klimax DS, Kikkin and Tundra Stereo. All positioned in Harmonihyllan with Mimer. The system is carefully installed.
Speakers have previously been: Espek, Majik 140, Klimax 320A, ATC-50, Akurate 212.
I wanted my Klångdang’s to be special so I choose black ash wish has been painted with transparent lacquer four times (is this the correct English?). I took the stands to an auto paint shop and had them paint them Ferrari red. I think it turned out very nice.
I feel that the sound character of the Klångedang T1 is much different from newer Linn speakers and that they remind me of how the ATC’s sounded. I really loved the sound character of the ATC’s but found them less involving than Akurate 212, hence the change. Since my most recent speakers before the T1’s was A212 much of the compassions have been made against them. Sound wise I don´t miss a thing. I feel that the T1’s goes deeper in the bass and are much easier to listen to at high volumes. In fact that is one of the major differences. The A212 did not invite to play loud as I thought that the sound just became annoying and hard. With the T1’s I just want to turn it up more and more. On the pre I nowadays normally play 70 to 80 (Yellow on Kikkin) and I never played that loud before. But I also think the T1’s have a lower sensibility that the Linn speakers so maybe that’s why. I would love to try them with a pair of Tundra monos as I think that I put the Stereo Tundra to much pressure right now. But at this point that don´t worry me as it sounds great. The amount and clarity in the bass is quite impressive from such a small speaker. I already said that I think it goes deeper than the A212 but I also think the bass is much easier to follow. The mids and highs are also very nice to listen to. The A212 seem very analytical in comparison. If the Klångdang is the real thing the A212 is a hifi reproduction of the real thing.
Said all this about the sound character how about the important stuff? Are they fun to listen to? Well they are. They are wonderful companions when you really want to dig into music. Music becomes very involving in a sort of natural way. Nothing stands out, it just plays. If you have ever been to a live concert with a string quartet playing for instance Mozart, you know what I mean. In such a concert it is almost impossible to think of the sound in a Hifi way. The sound and the music just flow. I think that the T1’s have this virtue. Everything is presented very homogeneous. Nothing stands out and it is very easy to follow and get involved in the music.
It also seems that the T’s is a very good match to the Tundra and Kikkin.
Great Work Anders Simonsson and Tonläget Hifi!
I have been living with Klångedang T1 for about ten days now and would like to share my first impressions with you.
First some background: my listening room is about 35 square meters and leads into a corridor. The room usually tends to swallow quite a lot of bass. Rest of the system consists of a LS NAS, Klimax DS, Kikkin and Tundra Stereo. All positioned in Harmonihyllan with Mimer. The system is carefully installed.
Speakers have previously been: Espek, Majik 140, Klimax 320A, ATC-50, Akurate 212.
I wanted my Klångdang’s to be special so I choose black ash wish has been painted with transparent lacquer four times (is this the correct English?). I took the stands to an auto paint shop and had them paint them Ferrari red. I think it turned out very nice.
I feel that the sound character of the Klångedang T1 is much different from newer Linn speakers and that they remind me of how the ATC’s sounded. I really loved the sound character of the ATC’s but found them less involving than Akurate 212, hence the change. Since my most recent speakers before the T1’s was A212 much of the compassions have been made against them. Sound wise I don´t miss a thing. I feel that the T1’s goes deeper in the bass and are much easier to listen to at high volumes. In fact that is one of the major differences. The A212 did not invite to play loud as I thought that the sound just became annoying and hard. With the T1’s I just want to turn it up more and more. On the pre I nowadays normally play 70 to 80 (Yellow on Kikkin) and I never played that loud before. But I also think the T1’s have a lower sensibility that the Linn speakers so maybe that’s why. I would love to try them with a pair of Tundra monos as I think that I put the Stereo Tundra to much pressure right now. But at this point that don´t worry me as it sounds great. The amount and clarity in the bass is quite impressive from such a small speaker. I already said that I think it goes deeper than the A212 but I also think the bass is much easier to follow. The mids and highs are also very nice to listen to. The A212 seem very analytical in comparison. If the Klångdang is the real thing the A212 is a hifi reproduction of the real thing.
Said all this about the sound character how about the important stuff? Are they fun to listen to? Well they are. They are wonderful companions when you really want to dig into music. Music becomes very involving in a sort of natural way. Nothing stands out, it just plays. If you have ever been to a live concert with a string quartet playing for instance Mozart, you know what I mean. In such a concert it is almost impossible to think of the sound in a Hifi way. The sound and the music just flow. I think that the T1’s have this virtue. Everything is presented very homogeneous. Nothing stands out and it is very easy to follow and get involved in the music.
It also seems that the T’s is a very good match to the Tundra and Kikkin.
Great Work Anders Simonsson and Tonläget Hifi!
Last edited by christian on 2013-06-14 18:32, edited 1 time in total.
Kind regards
Christian
Christian
Thanks for the review, Christian. I didn't know you already had a pair.
I agree that the word "flowing" is very suitable for how they deliver the music. Everything becomes so easy and accessible.
Like Ozzzy, I'd very much like to see a picture of those red stands and high gloss black ash T1's! You can email it to me if you want me to host it.
Please beware that if the digital file you're playing on your KDS has a level of 0 dB in the peaks - that's when every bit is 1 and the KDS delivers 2.0 Volts rms - the maximum volume is 78 on your Kikkin. Orange means that Tundra clips and going louder can result in damage to speakers and/or amplifier.
I agree that the word "flowing" is very suitable for how they deliver the music. Everything becomes so easy and accessible.
Like Ozzzy, I'd very much like to see a picture of those red stands and high gloss black ash T1's! You can email it to me if you want me to host it.
Please beware that if the digital file you're playing on your KDS has a level of 0 dB in the peaks - that's when every bit is 1 and the KDS delivers 2.0 Volts rms - the maximum volume is 78 on your Kikkin. Orange means that Tundra clips and going louder can result in damage to speakers and/or amplifier.