Question Audiovector R1 Arrete vs Focal Kanta 1

SpectacularFish

Novice Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
1
Points
4
Age
44
Location
Europe
Audiovector R1 Arreté
Focal Kanta 1

I have been listening at both at different dealerships, but with different rooms and music selection, I'm still not sure whats the best bet for me.

Anyone had the chance to side by side them, or otherwise have a strong opinion on either one of them?

I currently have the Focal Aria 906s in my system, so I am fairly familiar with the focal sound signature, and I am also very happy with them. The audiovectors seem to perform better on one of the shortcomings of the Arias, namely the bass response, and also have a extremely nice ribbon tweeter. The Kantas, to my ears, are better allrounders, not quite as sterile and precise as the Audiovector.
 
Hi @SpectacularFish - I haven’t heard the Kanta 1’s but I’ve gotten a good listen to the Sopras and Utopias and am familiar with the Focal sound, though I hear the Kanta is a bit more on the neutral side. I’ve owned the Audiovector SR 1 Arreté and have heard the R 3 so I’m familiar with the R series improvements. My main questions would be what music do you listen to and what is your amplification? Audiovector and Focal are very different “house” sounds as you point out and I do think there is a risk of the Audiovector sounding a bit dry depending on the setup, but my experience is that when they are dialed in just right they are superbly accurate and musically right, and much more refined than anything I have heard from Focal (even the Utopias).
 
Thanks for the thorough response!

I mainly listen to indie rock and pop, both badly produced 80s stuff and very well produced contemporary pop. Also throw in jazz, both new and old. And some hardcore, hip-hop and electronic stuff from time to time. What's important to me to portrait well on my setup is the less noisy sophisticated pop and jazz, and especially vocals, since I use my headphones if I want to blown out some steam. Also a note that I want a system that sounds good at lower volumes, to keep the ms happy. I also did audition the new JBL l100s, and even though it would love to own a pair, I would also need to own a basement, in which I don't.

As for my receiver, I sadly only have a powerful but not very refined Av-receiver, HK 3490. It's gets a little better further up the chain, with the Rega Fono MM and Rega P6.
 
Hi @SpectacularFish - that info helps a lot. I think I would go with the Focal over Audiovector if you like their sound. Two main reasons - your amplifier and your listening levels. I will try to explain.

Audiovector is what I call a “critical” speaker and it’s pretty fussy with associated gear. I think they really need the right match amplifier or they do not sing. It doesn’t have to be expensive necessarily but it needs to be high quality with a fuller tonal balance. I’m not familiar with the HK but i honestly cannot see an AV receiver being up to the job of providing the Audiovector with the quality signal they need. The AMT tweeter is beautiful but extremely high resolution and revealing of the purity of the signal (fussy with cables too!). You might actually get better results with the Signature than the Arreté, it is more forgiving. Naim is a good amp match and I bet Rega would be too, but IMO you would want something higher up in their line (e.g. at least Elicit) to match the R 1 Arreté.

The other issue is low volumes. This is probably one of the weaker points of Audiovector, they do not sound as involving as others at lower levels. IMO it’s actually because they’re extremely accurate and do not have the artificial mid bass boost/resonance that most box speakers have, including Focal. Audiovector is so clean and neutral tonally that they sound a bit thin in this scenario; however, crank them up to higher levels and they are extremely realistic and uncompressed, making other speakers sound bloated and congested. (Note this is how many ultra high end speakers line Magico are also tuned.) Now, I have not heard the R 1 and I hear they are a bit fuller than my SR 1 was, so it may be better, but all Audiovectors I’ve heard (SR 1, SR 3, R 3, and my SR 6) seem fundamentally tuned to be clean and right. If you are applying room correction or EQ on the HK you might be able to mitigate this a bit, and they have amazing bass output for their size.

Just my personal opinion of course. Incidentally have you tried a warmer sounding speaker like a Dynaudio Special Forty? They are not as sparkly as Focal or Audiovector, but are a lot of fun and do vocals beautifully.
 
Again, thank you so much for your well thought out responses, they are much appreciated!

I am planning on upgrading my amp and digital source, but since i'm emptying my wallet for the speakers, it may be a while, so your conclusion may be the correct one for me. Also the Focals would appreciate the upgrade when that day comes. Both Naim and Rega amps supposedly are great matches with both speakers, and are high up on my wishlist.

I am going back to try the audiovectors some more today or tomorrow, and will hopefully be able to test them at lower levels and with music I'm familiar with.

EQ could probably be a way to make them work better for me, I'm going to ask the sales person this.
Currently I don't have any room correction (if you mean digital room correction, i do own a rug), but I'm thinking of trying a DSP solution in the future.

Would integrating a active sub help for the fullness of the sound at lower volume levels, or would that be more to fill out the bottoms on normal/higher levels?

I have not listened to the Dynaudios, but i see one of my vendors carry them, and did not list them when I asked for tips, even though they have caught my attention in this research phase. Aren't the dynaudios a little heavier on the amp, and isn't that typically a sign that they don't work their best at low volme? I have listened to Graham Audio BBC LS5/9, which I guess is less sparkly and more on the warmer side? They did absolutely nothing for me, and solidified my preference for brighter speakers.
A problem with that conclusion is that have listened to my beloved Focal Arias in the same demo room, and they did not impress my there either..

EDIT: I see now that the dynaudios is not hard to drive. I'l check them out!
EDIT II: Okay, so they are more current hungry than watt hungry. I believe my amp may be a bad match with the dynaudios, but with the lower price, I could afford a upgrade. If you have a recommendation for an integrated amp with DAC, or a good pairing for about 2k, it would be much appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Hi @SpectacularFish - I was going to gently suggest reallocating some of the budget from the speakers to the amplifier, but didn’t want to be presumptuous. I’m very glad you came to that conclusion yourself. :) I really believe in investing equally if not more in the upstream components vs. speakers. You can make an affordable speaker sing with great electronics, but you can never make a great speaker sing with mediocre electronics. It is a bit like giving a Stradivarius to an amateur fiddler, they can only do so much with it.

If you go the Dynaudio route I would try asking around in Dynaudio forums what amps work well. They do need some power but shouldn’t be too hard to drive. If you were to go with Focal or Audiovector, one overlooked integrated I was going to suggest was a used Bryston B60. It’s been around for over 20 years but it is sneaky good and has a fuller tonality that works well with those speakers and at lower volume levels.

Incidentally, my colleague over at 10audio.com is a Focal owner and recently reviewed the Dynaudio Evoke series very favorably:
 
One other suggestion: I haven’t heard them, but many people shopping around in this category also like ATC speakers very much. Just be prepared to provide a lot of power - they are something like 84dB inefficient. Also re: your question about about sensitivity vs. low level listening, I am not sure but I have heard this theory before (horns and low-power tube amps being the most extreme argument for it). I am with you, many of the classic British monitors don’t do it for me, they lack life and speed for my tastes.
 
Hi again taww! Thank you soo much for your involvement in my conundrum! Also kinda surprised to see from your blog that you are situated in the US, with all your experience with scandinavian speakers!

I know I ideally should get a new amp too, but right now i thought it would be more fun to try to bring every element up to the wanted level. This way I can also look forward to saving up to an amp to match the rest of the equipment. Also this makes it easier to hone in on the sound I'm looking for, by removing the number of variables.

Still, I'm following up your advice, and have arranged a listening session on the dynaudios tomorrow.

My vendor could not really find me a deal with both the dynaudios and a suitable amp for the same price I'm getting for the Focals. Closest was with the Auralic Polaris, but I don't want an amp that's also a streamer, also not sure it is that suitable.

Found the following amps on our second hand market that may be a better fit (recommended by a random forum post).
- Parasound HINT 5
- Denon PMA-2500NE
Do you happen to know any of these? Personally i find it hard to understand what constitutes a "strong" or "weak" amp, even though I look at the watt output at different impedances.
Also, couldn't my HKs with their 120W in 8 ohms be enough to drive them OK, even though with little refinement?
 
Happy to help, though I don't know how great the advice is! We don't have as wide a selection of all the nice European brands over here but it's hard not to find Danish speakers everywhere.

I'm not personally familiar with the Parasound or Denon, but the Denon looks interesting and Parasound makes good clean amps. I'm asking around with some Audiovector owners if they have recommendations for an affordable amp, just so you know what the path there could look like later. The Naim NAIT 5si or a used NAIT XS3 could be a reasonably-priced option. The HK will work fine for now, you'll just be itching to upgrade it to get more out of your speakers. Power isn't about ratings, and a lot has to do with the match to the specific speakers, but there are some clues in the design e.g. size of the power supply and type of output stage. (And in general, receivers lack sufficient current vs. good audiophile amplifiers.) I have had both a 30 watt Pass Labs amp and a 300 watt Bryston amp in my system. The Pass is bigger and heavier and you'd never guess from listening that the Bryston is rated at 10x the power. This makes it hard to judge so you might have to just rely on reviews and other people's observations.
 
- Denon PMA-2500NE
Do you happen to know any of these? Personally i find it hard to understand what constitutes a "strong" or "weak" amp, even though I look at the watt output at different impedances.
I would call the Denon a strong amp. It has 80 watts into 8 ohms and a very good 4 ohm reading so that shows the amp has a good PSU and will sustain the speakers when called upon. Some speakers will dip to 3.2 ohms and a good power supply will stop distortion when the speaker reaches it's nadir.

I don't have the Denon amp but I do have the sister SACD player which has the same processor onboard and a very fine thing it is indeed.
 
Some discussion of appropriate amps here:

Hegel + Dynaudio could be a good one, apparently they work very well together. Perhaps you could save up for an H90?
 
Hegel + Dynaudio could be a good one, apparently they work very well together. Perhaps you could save up for an H90?

One of the largest hifi chains in the area actually sold packages with Dynaudio and Hegel for years. I see lots of people in the local forums complaining that it never really was such a great match. Don't know what to believe, because on paper it looks like a good match.

Anyways, listened to the dynaudios today and just WOW, so much life from such a small box. Really impressed with both the bass handling and the coherence through the frequencies. In my opinion they had a very 'live' sound. And they handled bad mastering much better than the Focals, and have a much deeper and fuller sound. I'm still very torn about the choice since I still prefer the beryllium tweeter of the focal, even though the Dynaudios maybe were better over all. And probably more natural and less tiring. Also I believe I will never think about adding a sub to the Dynaudios, since they sound almost like floorstanders. Future $$ saved right there. The Focals in my opinion sound better on lower volumes, but the danes are really a full package.
Dynaudios also over $2k cheaper than the Kantas. Lots of amp, lots of fun that could be done with that.

The guy I spoke to (same guy that offer me the focals) meant my current amp should work quite good with the Dynaudios as is, as you said too, even though I naturally will be looking out for a new amp after this purchase anyway.

Also got a new sit down with the Audiovectors today. Were once again really impressed, also worked better with poor material than both the focals and the JBL (surprisingly!), and just superb over all. Lot less holographic than the other speakers, but I think it is due to the positioning in that room.
BUT, at a point late in the listening session I casually mentioned that I am considering adding a sub a little later, and they informed me that they already had a REL sub wired up in the setup i was listening on! So I feel a little cheated for the real experience of how deep they really go alone. Should have asked him to turn it off, but i was on my way out anyway.
 
Hi @SpectacularFish - great observations! So glad you got to do more listening, that’s what counts after all. :)

I forgot to mention that I always used Audiovector SR 1 with a REL T-9 so I’m guilty as well.😆 I would agree they are not the most holographic - you can get them to “disappear” but it is a little trickier than others. For whatever reason the classic 2-way with 4-6” woofer and 1” dome tweeter is still the king of holography! Phase coherence is a big deal, I think it may also have something to do with matched dispersion patterns or something... 🤷‍♂️

Anyway based on all your comments, I’m feeling more strongly the Dynaudio route is a good one! The Special Forty is a very fun speaker, not as critically transparent as the other options but energetic and musical, and probably easier to live with in your setup. I liked it better than the more expensive Contour 20. If the bass ends up being a bit much in your room you can try the foam plugs. The Focal beryllium tweeter really isn’t my cup of tea (I’m a primarily classical/acoustic listener) but they do have some extra sparkle that many love. This does make it trickier to match in a system/room and in my experience for a given level of fidelity it is far easier to find a bright amp to make a soft dome tweeter come alive, than it is to find a softer one that can tame the beryllium. So IMO you will have more and better amp (and cable!) options down the road with Dynaudio. For speaker cables, I’m not sure what options you have in your region but here in the US, DH Labs makes an excellent wire (Q10 Signature) that I bet would work great with Dynaudio and give the tweeter a little extra sparkle and extension.

FWIW here are some recommended integrateds from Audiovector owners. Some of these probably are a little short on power for Dynaudios.

Rega Elex-R, Elicit-R better
Exposure 3010S2D
PureSound A30R (tubes)
Bryston or Simaudio (A little pricy and i think a little cool sounding for Av, should be great with Dynaudio)
Audiolab 8300A
Sugden
Naim NAIT
 
Glad you're still here with your suggestions!
Several of those amps are on my shortlist already, at least if I decide for something not that power hungry.

I'm taking the dynaudios on home loan, so it will be exciting to both check them out with my amp and room, and not at least to directly compare them with my old Focals. Sadly my 2nd hand amp has broken B speaker channels, so i can't just a/b test them with a simple push of the button.

Got a price for the audiovectors that were just a little out of reach for me. The sellers sounded over e-mail a little grumpy when I asked for additional discount, but I'm ready to settle for the Avantgardes if I conclude that i want to go that route.

I just can't shake that initial impression of the Focals, with the complete disappearance of the speakers, and the pinpoint 3D impression of stage. It was like magic, and I understand that's also the effect they are trying for at shows. My brain right now says dynaudio, but my heart is Focal. And there are something else involved with the audiovectors. The freedom grounding for example, really tickles my gadget nerd senses, and the engineering is just impressive. There's that "I know I shouldn't, but..."

Also, are all hifi retailers this pushy? I have facebook messages, email and texts comming at me from every direction right now. I'm used to forward salesmen in my profession life, but this is a little over board from a consumers perspective.
 
That’s terrific that you are able to try the speakers at home! Nothing beats that of course.

Honestly I don’t think you will really go wrong with any of your choices. If you really love the Focals, don’t overthink it. :) It’s worth trying the options but at the end of the day get whatever makes you happy. It’s certainly the safest bet. Audiovector can be in a different league if set up to the nines but it’s probably a more demanding speaker.

Don’t know about dealers lately, but I imagine the pinch of coronavirus times and the total shutdown of retail for a long stretch has many anxious to move merchandise to make up for lost sales. I’m actually pretty worried about the marginalization of high end audio here in the States being further accelerated, but we have much more pressing things to fix first, e.g. slowing down just the first wave of the pandemic and preventing more people from dying needlessly... 😔
 
Last thought on Audiovector. I think this review of the R 1 Signature is spot-on with my experience of Audiovector in general, both pros and cons:
 
So, I've just gotten the Dynaudios thorugh my door, and got them set up.
My first impressions after a little bit over an hour and a half of listening:
  • Over an hour and a half already? I was going to just check them out before I went and got some dinner
  • Runs circles around my arias in almost every category. Sounds like they have a flatter frequency response, and go noticeably deeper. Surprisingly nice holographics. I believe they sound a little bit less dramatic and fun on some of the material I give them, even though I'm unsure why that is. It is certainly not the case for most of what I have fed them, be it club music, jazz and rock.
  • Sounds like my amp handles them quite nicely. Thought the lower efficiency meant that I would need to really crank the volume, but a nudge above what i use on my arias is sufficient.
If these were my only option, my mind would have been made already, but further listening is needed.
Also, what kind of improvements could I expect with a better amp? More dynamics?
 
Hi @SpectacularFish - sounds promising so far! Your observations are very much in line with my expectations, which is always a relief for me as an audio reviewer. :D

Re: sounding less dramatic and fun than your Arias, I believe this is the Focal sound signature of adding a bit of boost in the presence region and lower midrange to make everything "pop" a bit more. This works well particularly if you don't have a very high-resolution amp/front-end, it is a bit of equalization that restores some lost presence and detail. Many people love this and it works very well for many systems and musical tastes; I listen almost entirely to acoustical classical music and it works less well for me, particularly with the type of electronics I prefer.

With a better amp, you will simply get more of the music. More detail, more space, more dynamics, more nuance, more rhythm. But I will call out 3 areas that matter to me a lot, and which I find you can continuously upgrade in a stereo in the unending search for realism.

First, "micro" dynamics. People associate dynamics with power, signal-to-noise and extreme swings between loud and soft. I think what is much more relevant to musical enjoyment are the subtle changes in amplitude that bring out all the subtle twists and turns of a phrase, the ebb and flow of intensity of a song and the pulse of a beat. This is the area where I find the amp often makes more of a difference than the speakers. I once put a modified Rega Brio amp on my friend's $90 Sony bookshelf speakers mounted on a wall connected with 20 ft of monster cable. He thought it was a waste of time, and swore his Sony receiver was awesome and the speakers were the limiting factor. His jaw quite literally dropped when I started playing music on the Brio - all of a sudden everything came alive with energy, not just loud and soft but musical lines sounded more expressive and just sung out. Even with the crappy speakers! You cannot get this without a great front-end/amp no matter how amazing your speakers are. I have found this area continue to improve in my system as I have gone from $300 to $3000 to $30k amplifiers.

Second, the area which I guess I will call "tonal colors" or "harmonic resolution" - the ability to preserve the complex and distinct harmonic signature of an instrument or voice. Most gear will gloss over the overtones of an oboe, the resonance of a soprano, the varying timbres of different strings (I'm a violinist, my wife is an oboist). Yes, you can still recognize the sound of Yo-Yo Ma or Ella Fitzgerald or a Steinway piano on most any decent audio system these days thanks to the very low distortion and noise of even the most common device e.g. an iPhone. But there is another level of beauty and palpability to their unique tones that can be unlocked with a higher resolution system - the shimmer and vibrato of a delicate passage, the rich overtones of a piano's lower registers, the brilliance of a piccolo in an orchestra. And again, speakers cannot recover what has been lost upstream in the amplifier. These sort of nuances honestly may not matter to a lot of listeners, particularly those who haven't had a lot of exposure to live acoustic music, which is why I think you start to see a lot of divergence of opinion whether high-end gear, cables, etc. are "worth it" - it's in these types of subtleties. But that is one of the things it is often necessary to pay more for. Some people also refer to this as midrange "rightness" or "completeness" - I think it's more about the harmonics and it's because the ear is most sensitive to midrange harmonics (and most of the music is in the midrange) that you hear this the most there.

Lastly, frequency extremes. On the low end, it usually takes strong, clean, low-impedance power supplies to deliver proper bass that has tone, impact and clarity. You can tune a component to have a richer, fuller bass, at the risk of making it sound flabby or boomy; you can tune it to have extremely tight, clear bass, at the risk of sounding lean and hollow. It usually takes higher-end amps to get both without compromising one another, and even with the mega-buck gear it becomes a matter of taste. At the other end, treble is where the ear is really sensitive and this is often where people hear the most qualitative differences between amps. There are many factors - noise, power supply quality again, circuit stability, frequency response, etc. - but in the end just as in the bass, it comes down to delivering all the signal without some compromise. E.g. I find Rega and Naim gear to have a softer top end that sounds very pleasant, but a bit "closed" and losing some fine resolution. Many other amps have extremely clear treble but with a trace of harshness that can get fatiguing. The great amps will give you detail and extension and openness while sounding smooth, natural and alluring. This is where often it is more about finding the right balance for your system and ears than spending a lot of money - you can buy a $40k amp for your Focals or Dynaudios but if the balance isn't complementary, it won't sound right.

Anyway, that is my $.02 - all those words are meaningless compared to just getting a nice amp in your system and hearing the difference, but hopefully that gives you something to be excited about. :)
 
one more thought - I am confident you can get the “drama” and “fun” back with the Dynaudios without losing any of their superior qualities with the right amp and cables. ;)
 
Re: the thing about drama and fund. I am absolutely confident the dynaudios can deliver on that too, since they are already doing that for the most part. I think almost everything I play sound better on them, and I cant figure out what the songs that don't, have in common. It is in any case a negligible problem, and just shows, as you say, that every speaker, regardless of price level, have strengths, weaknesses and colorations that works differently on different material, and for different ears.

Thank you for introducing me to the term micro dynamics. I feel that is one of core strenghts of the dynaudios vs my arias. I think i have in the past equated detail to detail in the tweeter-range. The micro dynamics I present now makes the speakers handle complex break downs in rock songs easily, and just adds to the addictivness of almost everything i listen to.

Also harmonic resolution is something i feel is usefull when describing the speakers. I feel this is in some ways related to micro dynamics too, no? I have found myself enjoying music that i did not entirely "get" before, like Bill Callahan, and i think that is because of how the speakers handle the more subtler instrument use, and his focus on each and every note. And of course his voice.

What ever I'm getting, i'll definitely getting a better amp before long, and probably buy and sell on the secondhand market until I'm happy.

I actually still have the dynaudios on audition at home, and tomorrow my supplier is coming over with the Kantas too, so i can directly compare them. The level of service I get from them is much beyond what i expected, and I'm very thankful. The dynaudios are on their way of capturing my heart too, but we'll how they fare when my first love is here. Next on the bachelor...
 
159715439571453401880544332791.jpg
Can't deny I'm having fun with both of them!
 
Okay, so my conclusion is that my amp can't really handle the Dyns when I play my records, since the signal is a tad weaker than the other sources. With digital sources they at least matches the focals, and also have a more full and warm sound.

So I either need to get the Dyns and a new amp, and with that get something I atm don't know how will sound, or the focals as they are in my system right now, which is also a very good solution.

I have trusted the guys at the shop with this decision, since it's a complete toss up for me right now, and in all more or less the same price.
 
Very nice! Very cool your dealer is so accommodating with in-home trial, that’s a rarity.

What is the price difference between the Kanta and Special 40? What sort of amp could you get? I honestly think upgrading the amp may have as much benefit as upgrading the speakers, maybe more in some aspects. To be totally frank, the quality of the speakers and the amp are very mismatched and you are not really getting the full value of your purchase.
 
The price difference was about 2,25k USD. So enough to get a real good one used, like the Denons discussed earlier, or Parasound HINT 6.

In the end, I opted to get the Focals. Both because of gut feeling, and because that meant that I could have a system I am happy with right now, without any more shopping and uncertainty.
It is kinda ridiculous to power them with a amp 1/20th of the price, but since I am very happy with the sound as of right now, getting a new amp is something that I am comfortable with doing at a later time.

And it sounds like i should NOT show you what kind of wiring I have used for my testing :)

Thank you so much for your help! You have helped me getting a better understanding of what I like with a speaker, and also broadened my tastes.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom