Muscality

I am afraid that the EA II needs much more power than Keith would admit. Even enough power is feeded, the sound is still too analytical for me. Both the EA I & II's are within 100 feet of my office. I know what I am talking about. Best luck for those whe keep or can find the EA I.

This hobby & the people involved never cease to amaze me. First, I am not directing any comments toward any one person, if anyone at all. I have been searching the web like everyone else to read all the various reviews on the EAII'S. I did this not remembering (I was into the hobby awhile ago and stopped for a short spell.) that my ears are the main importance, while aesthetics had a play in this descision also (Hence the Faber's)I still wanted a great sounding/performing speaker. Basically I was willing to accept a slight loss in sound here and there for the looks and size of the speaker. With that said, I broke it down to Sonus Faber. I listened to all the Faber models including the deleted models. This is where my point comes into to play: I really think that overall, tested in the same room, same amplification (Classe, Krell) that the Amator 2's are the better speaker. Wow! this can't be! the 2's don't have the legendary Esotar tweeter!!! They have some cheaper scan model.! First, I don't think necessarily that the 2's sound "better" but they are at least equal in overall balance and neutrality, give or take this one being better in areas and that one being better in areas. Slam the 2's had more of?? at least that day in that room. Now, the reason I think they are the better speaker is that you don't have to use a mansion heating monster to drive them. I switched over to a Linn Classik (40wts in 8 ohms.) and very little was lost. The original Amators were squaukey and darker than dark....obviously not enough. They are an old great design but the new model is just as good sounding but more up to date and efficient. Yes, this is all subjective but the 4 other enthusiasts that were there for the comparison agreed beyond the shadow of the doubt.

Now the moral: I think most "audiophiles" (whatever that is.) are willing to HEAR what they are TOLD. How many of these people would have recognized the difference if they weren't informed about the change in the tweeter? Fact is that the 2's are more of a speaker (larger and heavier.), a new design/shape that Faber seems to think is better for overall quality of sound. So, are they worth as much as the original? Yes. Are the originals worth what they went for? Yes.

Easy to drive, easy to room match, overall smooth lush detailed sound with a lot of punch and bass for it size. I have had both the originals and now the Amator II's and I have to say that the II's are more refined in build and sound.

I believe that it is indeed subjective listening.
Personally I have had the Electa Amator 1 for 3 years and the EA 2 for abt a year.Im now using a pair of extremas.
I cant comment on finish as both look equally good. Of course I am slightly put off by the tiny tweeter of the EA 2 vs the 1.1'Esostar of the EA 1. I do prefer the solid look of the esostar assembly but I believe that overall, the new tweeter is almost as good.

I used a Conrad Johnson PV 11a and an 60 w integrated DIY
push pull which couldnt maximise the EA 1.It drove the EA 2 better.

I do believe that components make a difference when driving Sonus Fabers.If i were playing with with a powerful and refined solid state amp, i would stick with the EA 1. The EA 2 is friendlier to amps as hence more applicable for general use.

Both are more transparent and powerful than the Concerto series which IMO is mediocre.
I do not want to stirtroubles but I do find more peopl who
sell off the EA 2 than EA 1.
Happy Subjective Listening !!!!

Amazing how opposite I feel about these two speakers than the last reviewer...so incredibly subjective. I too had the EA I's but I found the direct opposite than the last review. As far as the build...the 2's are head and shoulders more refined and better built, my originals started to seperate at the finger joints. The 2's are the better speaker in every respect...in my opinion.

Similar Products Used:

SF EA I

Transparency, musicality, wide and revealing soundstage

Extreme low bass

Sonus Faber are well known for their musicality, add to this a wonderfull, treedimensional and palpable midrange, excellent bass, even if not on large subwoofer scale, and clean and detailed high's and you get one of the most satisfying loudspeakers on the market.
They look easy to drive, but to get the best out of them use high quality and powerfull amplification.

Similar Products Used:

B&W 804, SF Concerto GP, Thiel 2.3, Aerial 7B

Clarity, depth, soundstage, accuracy

None

ALthough I am only a casual audiophile, I think I have found an engineering as well as aesthetic masterpiece: the Sonus Faber Electa II. This is the mose accurate, crisp, and detailed speaker I have ever heard. The musical depth is outstanding. Performances feel live and immediate. I admit to listening mostly to classical music, but in my occasional forays to other formats, I don't find these speakers lacking in any way, presenting jazz and rock with a full, rich vibrancy.

I don't like the sound of bass-emphasis speakers, and I believe the sacrifice in those designs is the loss of overall detail throughout the frequency range in both the speaker and the listener's ear. But then many people who live in a congested urban environment would be hard-pressed to appreciate the subtle sounds of a remote forest.

I highly recommend these speakers, but they're not for everyone.

Similar Products Used:

Concerto

perfect sound when properly installed

good amplification required, good cables, original stands

I listen to classical music and I prefer baroque chamber music and vocal works. I also listen to piano works. For this type of music I find the Elect Amator II to be beautiful and I feel that my system is now close to perfection. These speaker must be closely matched in order for them to deliver. This is the story of my quest for musical perfection.

1- Bass range
The Electa do not work in the bass range unless you fit them with the original SF stands. For two reasons:
A- the speakers need a reaction from the ground to produce a tight bass. the SF stands are heavy, have steel adjustable spikes to grab the ground and the speakers are bolted tightly to them
B- the SF stands are adjustable in height: this is handy to control the balance of bass-treble in relation to the listening room

2- treble range
Violins sound like violins with the right cable. I have tried many but found that MIT2 delivers the real sound of violin. do not try to save money on the treble cable.


3- mid range
This was the most difficult part. The Electa Amator II have a cross over at 2.5khz. This means that the basic part of the vocals is performed by the woofer while the harmonics are played by the tweeter. With my first installation the vocals sounded like they had a 'cold' (too much emphasys on the tweeter-harmonics). I solved the problem by bi-amping the Electa Amator with a couple of Atoll AM100 amps, using MIT2 cables to drive the tweeters and woofer cables with as low as possible AWG (low resistance ==> low attenuation)).

Now I feel that the sound of my system is uncolored; bi-amping the Electa Amator with two Atoll AM100W amps has given them the speed of sound in reproducing music microdynamic detail (like the beating of a piano chord) and music seems to be made of air.
I truly recommend the Eelcta Amator II

Guido

Similar Products Used:

These speakers can have a beautiful sound, but need a lot of care in the installation, otherwise they will not sing.

Superb build quality; transparency across the range; expansiveness of soundstage;

None to speak of (unless you are after the ultimate in low frequency)

The first thing to say is that there are a number of reviews below for these speakers that should simply be ignored or (better still) deleted by Audioreview. Those reviews which are not comprehensible, contain unsupported emotional comments or wild assertions serve no useful function in assisting potential buyers making informed decisions.

I auditioned a pair of the EA IIs after reading most of the reviews and, whilst I discussed some of the issues mentioned below with the dealer, my assessment of the speaker was largely and ultimately on the basis of what I heard. This is what I recommend for those of you who don't know what to make of all these conflicting reviews.

Sound quality was "largely" (and not entirely) the deciding factor because I could not ignore the fantastic build quality of these speakers. The combination of walnut and leather won me over completely. The standard of craftsmanship of these hand made units cannot be undervalued in these days of mass production. I can't help touching them. Even my wife cannot take her eyes off them!

Anyway, back to the sound quality. For me, the EA IIs were the best all rounder I auditoned up to the 5000 pound mark (US$7.5k). They were very transparent across the range (voices and instruments sound like real and not synthetic). They had a wide soundstage with 3-D imaging - improved by toe-ing in. However, I do agree with the comments below that that they are not the ultimate in deep bass at the same price. Don't be mis-led, they are not bass shy and for 95% of listners the loss of extra bass won't matter and will be more than compensated by the other facets of this speaker. I found that the SF stands helped enhance the lows (made them tighter and more profound). I also parntered them with Krell amplification.

I auditioned them (i) without stands, (ii) with other manufacturers' stands and (iii) with the SF adjustable stands. I agree that the SF stands are the best partners. This adds to the price but, as a bonus, the walnut and iron stands enhance the aesthetics too.

In summary, I would say that these are some of the best standmounted speakers on the market at any price. Listen for youself and don't be taken in by some of crap written below.

Similar Products Used:

Celestion range, Mission range, Martin Logan Aerius, SF Concertinas

Awesome transparency, huge soundstage, great build quality and looks.

Lack of deep, deep bass

These speakers are awesome! I tried other high priced (and more expensive) speakers like the Mini Utopia and Wilson Cub but neither could convey the feeling of music like the Sonus Fabers. With well recorded DVD's from Chesky, the artists seem to be right in the room with me. And I haven't even broken in or optimized the placement of the speakers yet! The Sonus Fabers provide transparency and soundstaging that I have never experienced in all my years in the high-end audio hobby. The only weakness I can detect with these speakers is the lack of deep bass, but let's not forget that this is a bookshelf speaker. Another weakness of the speaker stems from their superiority. The SFs revealed recordings of bad quality such that some of the albums I used to love are now somewhat frustrating to listen to on my home system. Of course, this is not a fault of the speakers, but of the recordings.

The look and build quality of the SF's are also first-rate, especially when mated with the SF stands. The fit and finish of the woodwork is amazing. The speakers are always the first thing people comment on when they enter my apartment.

As for value, these are definitely for audiophiles. For the price I paid, I got a fantastic value, but for the full retail price, you can probably get 80-90% of the way there for about $3,000.

As for being hard to drive, I'm not sure if I agree. I have a 70 watt Conrad Johnson tube amp that seems to work fine for my small room (roughly 15x12).

My system:
Muse Model 8 DVD-CD transport
Muse Model 296 DAC
Audible Illusions L1 preamp
Conrad Johnson Premiere 11A amp
Kimber Cable 8TC biwire speaker cables
Kimber Cable Silver Streak interconnects
Muse I3W3 digital cable

Similar Products Used:

Totem Mani2, JM Lab Mini Utopia, Wilson Cub