Tower Speaker Reviews

I have a pair on pre-order and originally was going to purchase the Magnepan 3.7i which many people and reviewers consider to be the best value in speakers under 10k, until now ...
Thanks for the review and please advise what amps / preamps you used for the review and perhaps your thoughts on power requirements.
Also- FYI, I have heard from Goldenear that the first shipment is delayed again. August is the latest update for initial deliveries to dealers in the USA.

It is strange you haven't described your test system.

Since value is still a factor even in a $5,000 speaker, what would also be considered a worthy value Amp/Preamp?

Would hooking it to just an AV Receiver lose it some of its fidelity compared to hooking it up with an amp/preamp?

What about the Music? Should it just be Vinyl, SACD or CDs as a minimum quality of storage or are MP3s acceptable?

Would I be misusing these speakers if I play electronic music (House, Techno, Dub)?

I am in my early 30's and could only wish to own these speakers (though I will be able to afford the Triton Seven Towers - thank you Sandy Gross/GoldenEar) anytime soon. Great audio makes me happy and it is satisfying to read the passion and excitement that cannot be held back by the reviewer when writing about these speakers.

Those looking for more information than what was given should look at the reviews for the earlier models.

Looking forward to Darryl's review of Definitive Technology's flagship speakers as well.

So nothing new just more cowbell, er, subwoofer built-in

I looked and didn't see any link to or mention of the gear used to review these speakers. It would be nice to know what other speakers these compare to? Revel Salon 2, B&W 800, Wilson Sasha etc...

And it was no contest the Revel is a much much better speaker. I think these speakers are a great value and to me the tweeter is basically perfect but to say they are as good as anything out there at any price I don't agree at all.

I felt that this was a peace about Sandy more than the speakers. It could had gone into details on the gear, room, file resolution etc. Also, how would the fair with other more expensive speakers? Can you provide examples in cases the Triton One would be better? since you suggest it would sound better for less.

I agree with other readers that a direct comparison vs other speakers in the same price range would make for an interesting read. I realize this is not a format Sound & Vision or Home Theater mag utilized in the past but maybe should be considered. The aesthetics of the Triton series may not be on par with the speakers they compete with regarding value - but to hear how they stack up sonically vs speakers two or three times the price would be cool.

Since you are in the process of reviewing the ST-L, it would also be very interesting if you included some comparisons to the Triton 1 since they are priced at the same level.

Can't wait to hear them - and this is the first speaker I have ever ordered without hearing them first

Nobody in the reviewing trade does ABX comparisons. It would put their advertisers at risk.

Honestly, this type of gushing review is a bit sickening- but not unusual- Goldenear is the most hyped product line in memory. I auditioned them last week [2,3 and 7]. Despite the klutziness of the salesman and the shortcomings of the demo, they all sounded good and I enjoy a bit of each track of DSOTM. After I left, I decided it wasn't revelatory or any of the other hyperbolic descriptions in this review. In fact, the salesman warned me the Triton tweeter had a narrow vertical dispersion, which is bad for my setup. I then ordered a pair of much more attractive and what I believe will be great- sounding speakers - Aperion Grand Verus Towers, which were on sale for $799 each. I have some earlier book shelf speakers of theirs and have been very happy with them

Everyone has thier own taste in speakers, but I have heard many of the very best for under 15k and the Triton twos are worthy of the ridiculous gushing press, they are THAT good. The first time I heard the Triton twos, I was completely underwhelmed. I think the room and equipment was all wrong. It was a mid level receiver and a smaller room which did nothing for the sound. The same same exact pair borrowed from the dealer and auditioned in my space sounded exactly like all the reviews. I pre-ordered the Triton ones that day !!
(equipment used was Rogue Spynx, Peachtree nova/200 and Emotiva XPA2- all sounded great with these speakers)

I was thinking the same exact thing regarding this review as some of the commenters on here: It is WAY TOO SHORT. Its never goes into any meaningful detail on these speakers, scrutinizing their sound quality, setup, its reads more like an advertisement. These are 5k speakers people, and I want a little more than silly, distasteful comparisons to condoms when describing the tweeter. In fact, I have the print magazine, and the length of the review is barely three pages, maybe less. In addition, the review of the M&K system is about TWO pages! All that for a system that costs seventeen thousand dollars!!! That is just not acceptable.

I've subscribed to Home Theater for almost 10 years now, and I can say that sadly, this magazine has been gradually but obviously dumbed down--for WHO I have no idea--, and I am NOT happy.

Rob,
Did I in any way advocate for LESS review space? Certainly not a half page as you say. But, giving the SAME space to a 17k system as you would to a 1k system is a little ridiculous. The space used for the M&K system and the Golden Ear speakers is more appropriate for cheaper speakers, and the overall body of the review should have been a little for substantial. Apparently I'm not the only one that thinks this. All I can say is, I'm disappointed with the direction things are going as of late.

I must be naïve in requesting a comparison if this has not been done in the past due to the fear of pissing off advertisers. This is essentially done regardless in the "Top Picks" sections as there are top picks and those that missed the cut. Then there are products that get marginal ratings so I don't think it is the fear mentioned earlier. I hope that it is because not every reviewer gets to listen to all products reviewed and a comparison is therefore out of the question...but it would still make for great reading! For example, I love reading the car publications when they compare this year's top five SUV's, sports cars, luxury sedans, etc.

I got a quote of GE customer forum site:

"I have read a number of comments from listeners/reviewers who found the dispersion of the High-Velocity Folded Ribbon (HVFR) to be quite limited. CNET observed " I did note some treble softening when I stood up; so it appears that the tweeter's vertical dispersion is limited." A reader observed in response "Unfortunately, the detail just wasn't there - unless the ribbon in the center of the speaker was pointed straight at your ear. I must have looked absolutely silly in the listening room because I was stooping to get my ears in line with the speaker's center but it was amazing how much more detail was contained in about a 6" area of the room."

But, another reader responded " I stood and sat in every part of the room; no noticeable difference in the quality of the sound or the tweeter dispersion. "

"I am concerned since I am planning a home theater with 3 tiers of seating with some 26 inches vertical distance between ear levels at the front and back rows. So, only one of those tiers could be well aligned with the LCR tweaters."

--Triton One have similar problems since the tweeter is the same as the Two? If so, how can it wasn't reviled in the "go out of our way" review?

It sure would be nice to see some horizontal radiation pattern measurements. Looks like good drivers, except for that rising hot top by the tweeter.

Gross admirers should know that he was reportedly the person responsible for those ubiquitous Polk ads through the 1980s with quotation marks about the headline --- "Greatest speaker ever made by far" and the like --- as though someone had actually said it. A uniquely, shockingly sleazy practice even by the standards of CE.

While I keep hearing that these speakers are great, I really would like some objective information in how they perform. I really get the fact that you like Sandy Gross, it is very evident in the review and perhaps he has earned that so far. However, this review should not focus on Sandy Gross, hell it should barely mention him, it should be focused on the speaker itself and without any possible indication of favorable points due to the fact that Sandy Gross is behind this speaker. I have been reading articles by this magazine for a very long time, it is disheartening to see a review like this. You even mention that Sandy had to tell you that the passive drivers work, I would tell you that as well if I designed the speaker. I can tell that you're a good writer, please focus on the performance of products and explain in detail why they are great, or bad. I am sorry, but this review cannot be taken seriously.

I just received my S&V print issue and read this review again and I have to agree with GuiltyRocker. In addition I thought the entire first paragraph under "A Living, Breathing Speaker" was wasted space that could have been used to provide useful information to the reader.

What a waste of a review! I will not be renewing my subscription.

Come on now, this is a great publication that has been an amazing source of articulate info over the years.
I wouldn't go to an extreme and cancel your subscription, but that's me.
I do think that the writer and/or editorial team should respond to the overwhelming responses above. Perhaps, a followup piece, this time in depth review of the actual speakers themselves (instead of of the designer) and some actual head to head comparisons to speakers in their respective price point and higher.
I already have a pair on order, and don't need to be sold, but would love some expert analysis and relevant data regarding equipment recommendations, etc,

The Triton may be a fantastic speaker, maybe not. Unfortunately based on this review I cannot tell if it's right for me or not. How much amp power needed? Builtin powered subs, how do they sound in HT? What do they compare to? I'm sure Sandy is quite capable of designing a quality product; but the review shouldn't be based on Sandy but on real world information that will help us make a buying decision. I think your reviewers are missing the boat lately. People want to know more specific information to help determine if a product will work for their set-up. I had similar concerns with your review of the SVS PB2000 sub last issue, you failed to review the sub in a room it was designed for which is 2-3,000 cubic foot room; instead you put it in a 5,000 cubic foot room and called it lacking bass punch. Give the people what they want; in-depth, quality reviews based on real world testing. You would not review a Macintosh amp using cheap speakers so why review a sub in a room too big for it? Same with the Tritons; what size room etc should work best etc? I'm beginning to wonder if this subscription is money well spent.

I'm the proud owner of two speakers (Polk Audio SDA SRS 2.3tl and now Definitive Technology 7001SC) designed from companies Sandy Gross had a major hand in. Both great speakers. Yet in my view he spent too much time talking about Sandy Gross (who I respect) and little time on the review of these speakers.
I have read the follow-up by Mr. Wilkinson-it helped. However nothing on: distortion levels;
Dispersion of the tweeter
Comparisons to stand alone subwoofers.
Sir you say you had limited space; if you would have focused on reviewing the speakers-you would have plenty of space.
I concur with other readers. I looked at older reviews of the speakers I need-there was much more detail!

The huge (15 db!) peak at 12-13khz in the measured response graph is very worrisome and not addressed in the review.

I am a long time audio engineer and I am setting up a Stereo/HT system finally after years without any home system only listening to recorded and live music on the best Pro sound systems in the world. Fortunately after 35 years of mixing my ears tested very good recently. In my business and my company in particular we are very sensitive to frequency response and range. Therefore my expectations are high. Due to size and placement I do not want to use a separate sub but extended tight bass is very important.

I just got to listen to the GE Triton1, Revel 208 and DT Mythos ST-L speakers last night. I have been auditioning B&W CM10 and now CM10S2 as well as the Paradigms for the last few months. I had also previously listened to the Revel 208 at another dealer which did not impress in that demo. I wanted to buy the CM10S2's but was not impressed with the clarity of the bass. I thought the bass on the CM10S1 sounded cleaner. The CM10S2 tended to be a little muddy at times and was not as extended as I wanted. I did like the midrange clarity openness and imaging which to no surprise was favored in the selection of the sales person. I found the Revel 208 to be lacking in bass and a bit forward in the midrange but did image well and was fairly open. The Mythos had a good bottom end with the built in powered sub but had a hole in the bass above the sub. Mid and imaging were good but not great. High end again good but not great.

I then listened to the Triton1. I was immediately blown away by the depth of bass extending way down below the program and the tight response. This is what I am used to on my large pro systems. The highs were very detailed and clear imaging well and yes the 15K peak is right where it should be. Other companies have the peak at 10K which makes the high end seem less natural and bright and not as open. Whoever says you can't tell a lot about a speakers specs doesn't know how to read the specs. It sounded like its graph with the extended bass and high end. The low phase distortion was apparent in the midrange. The midrange was not over powering but set just right for clarity and imaging. The midbass was there but not too strong. The use of a high power sub amp with exceptional high bit and sample rate have allowed the sub to integrate seamlessly. Lowering the x-over point has moved the transition over an octave below the vocal range while the mid-high x-over is well above. Powered Sub strong down to 20HZ leaving all my amp [power for mids and highs. Perfect.

To sum it up this speaker was perfect for me and I am ordering a pair today. I am not sure what to drive it with and would like recommendations. I want a multi zone receiver with 7-9 amps (5 main and 1-2 remote zones) and a high quality decoding for surround sound. I am considering a Marantz? I am sure there are other options but so far have preferred the Marantz over the Pioneer, Dennon and Yamaha receivers.

I am sure I will get many comments and I look forward to your responses.

Just picked up the Triton 1 speakers. I originally heard them with an Exposure integrated amp w/ 110 wpc. I am building an HT system so I listened to the Marantz. I was interested in the 7009 but they only had the 5005 on display. I was very disappointed with the 5005. Very harsh in comparison and not as good on the low end. Would the 7009 be much better? We then tried the Cambridge Audio. I was interested in the 751 but they only had the 551 which was much better all around and closer to the Exposure. Extended bass and a smooth high end. I expect the 751 to be a little better. We then tried the newer Sony receiver. Good mids and highs but a definite lack of deep tight bass. On the extreme end we listened to a Mac preamp and a 300wpc Mac power amp. Very smooth and detailed. Warm deep bass. Very easy to listen to. Better than the Exposure or the Cambridge but I don't think I can justify the price.

There must be other receivers I should try. Please let me know any suggestions. Looking to stay within 2-4K range for a 7.1 system with amps. Let me know.