In Reply to: Temptation, Salon, Sig800, C40 etc posted by ws on December 10, 2001 at 02:33:19:
According to Larry Greenhill who reviewed the Temptation, and who happened to have reviewed the Evidence for $tereophile also, the Temptation just sound a wee bit smaller in scale compared to its more expensive big brother. It also has a smaller sweet spot, and does not image as well particularly from the far field. The midrange is also not as clear or something to that effect. Since it has smaller woofers and smaller cabinets, it also doesn't go as deep in the bass although the reviewer noted that the bass sound both naturally supple while retaining good visceral impact. He did not comment on its ease of drive (since he got 3 big ss amps -a krell, a levinson and a bryston if I remember correctly to drive it perhaps), altho he noticed that the Temptation's sensitivity is lower by 2 dBs. I did notice from the measurements that the Temptation seems to be a tougher load than the Evidence - perhaps because it does not have an impedance correction circuit as the Evidence did.Considering how good the Confidence 5 are, I suppose the Temptation would be hard to fault esp because it has the Evidence' tweeters and midrange drivers (but different xover and xover freqs.) but significantly more affordable. They are tall but quite elegant looking especially compared to that ugly looking Wilson MAXX or that robotic Revel. But I'd be cautious with it if I were u ... the Evidence sounded too bassy in the local showroom which is even bigger than your room and loaded with tubetraps and diffusors. The Temptation is smaller but not significantly so, and the close proximity of the top two woofers to a low ceiling might have undesirable side effects ...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Temptation, Salon, Sig800, C40 etc - Hyperion 12/11/0103:05:04 12/11/01 (1)
- Re: Temptation, Salon, Sig800, C40 etc - ws 03:29:03 12/11/01 (0)