Speaker Asylum: 22L versus 21L - not worth pulling hairs over... by machani

I went to the dealer (Signature Audio, Vancouver) again yesterday, this time with the wife. The dealer was kind enough to let us play our own CDs for about 20 minutes on the 21L.

He was adamant about not opening the box of the 22L, his last pair. But he was extremely helpful in every other way. It turns out he is liquidating all his Quad L series, for the same reasons as Nathan had stated about his Quad dealer.

The wife and I both loved the sound of the 21L and I favored taking a 21L home. But the wife felt the rosewood would do better with our furniture. All the 21Ls were in piano black and the last 22L was in rosewood.

The long and the short of it was, I went with the wife's opinion (a good thing) and took the 22L home. At least it would satisfy my curiosity. It turns out in the end that my concerns about the 22L were not warranted.

As to the differences between the 21L and 22L, first kindly note that the auditions were performed in different environments, both not ideal, and also the 22L is being auditioned out of the box.

I have the 22L pair set 6' apart and 2' off the back and side walls (due to current furniture and cabling restrictions). Currently I'm using single-wire and the 8ohm tap from my Cayin amp. (Later I plan to experiment with better speaker positioning, biwiring and using the 4ohm tap.)

Even under non-ideal circumstances, the 22L is able to produce a good soundstage and imaged as good as the 21L (i.e., excellent imaging). The imaging is better than what my JMLab Chorus 714 S speakers can produce.

The 22L seems smoothly integrated out of the box, although the top end is not as smooth as my JMLabs (which have the inverted dome metal tweeter). But then, the 22L is just out of the box and should smoothen as it burns in.

There were no significant tonal differences between the 21L and 22L that I could discern, except that the 22L produces more bass weight, which presents itself in recordings that have lower bass. Note that the 21L is not lacking in bass in any way. And the bass on the 22L definitely does not dominate other sound.

As to the bass quality on the 22L, it is well controlled and non-boomy. It goes low but not as deep as one would have ideally liked (which is probably what Duckman meant when he said that it is not of the highest quality). So in that one respect, the tight, fast bass of the 21L could be preferred by some. For me the 22L's bass depth is fine and controlled enough for my liking.

The 22L does seem a little more forward sounding than the 21s (echoing the HiFiChoice reviews quoted by Nathan) but is definitely not bright. Also, in keeping with what Nathan said, the 21L presents itself as slighted more detailed in the midrange than the 22L, but not to the point of the 22L being veiled.

Both the 21L and 22L don't show any boxiness that I could discern, which a great improvement over my JMLabs.

The bottom line seems to be that both the 22L and 21L are very enjoyable, musical, and non-fatiguing speakers. It only becomes a question of personal preferences of one over the other. Slightly more bass weight in the 22L. Slightly more detailed midrange in the 21L. Again, this is just an initial impression under less than ideal circumstances.

At this price range, one cannot go wrong in chosing one or the other.
___________

C N Machani