Brian
08-20-2003, 07:31 AM
With the Philips/Bozak Symphony setup, I arranged it so I could substitute another system onto the Symphonys which previously I could not easily do. I've been listening to the Sherwoods since the amp's return on my sets of Advents and Klipsch but last night I decided to try them with the big Bozaks. My main system has been with the McIntosh MC2105/C28/MR77 until I recently moved it over to do a very long term listen with the Philips. The 2105 pumps 105 watts, the Philips 210 watts and the Sherwood 36 watts. Average rms levels with both the Mc and Philips is about 1.25 watts so for my average listening level 36 watts is within reason but at extreme dynamics I would expect a slight compression.
The Sherwoods were a real pleasure. The integration of the drivers which can be a bit of a problem with the size and distance between drivers was better than either the Mc or the Philips. The bass does not have the control of the Philips but seems more evident than with the the Mc. High end darker than either of the others, does not have the hardness of the Philips, conveys almost all of the resonance with string instruments that the Mc does. Female vocals have a pronounced sibilence not evident with either of the others and not evident when I use the Sherwood with either the Advents or Klipsch. Have not figured out that one, yet. Piano comes through beautifully as does acoustic guitar. Electric guitar is slightly less distinguishable than with either the Mc or Philips but, also is not as harsh as with the Philips. The soundstage, something I'd not expected, really opened up both in width and front to back. Far better than with the ss systems. The others present a big sound, in fact, the wall of sound that so many experience with big speakers but, the Sherwood got it all in focus - still a big wall but, with dimensionality.
The tuner falls short on pulling power but, I'm comparing it to my Philips and Mc both of which are top line tuners. I've always liked the Sherwood and with some music I like it better than either of the others. Classical especially can be listened to very long term without any fatique. The Mc in this regard is better than the Philips but, the Sherwood is better than the Mc. On jazz, it presents a rather laid back, lazier rendition than with the Mc while the Philips breaths life and energy into the music. I'm finding that a really good system may have to include several tuners as well as turntables or at least cartridges.
Over the next few weeks, I think I'll leave the setup up and running especially trying to address the female vocal issue.
Conclusion: The Mc and Philips both are better overall but not by as large margin as I'd have expected. Factoring in either the original price or current prices, the Sherwood may be the winner for all but the brand maniacs or those with fat wallets. Overall, of the 3, it presents an excellent balance between presentation and price.
The Sherwoods were a real pleasure. The integration of the drivers which can be a bit of a problem with the size and distance between drivers was better than either the Mc or the Philips. The bass does not have the control of the Philips but seems more evident than with the the Mc. High end darker than either of the others, does not have the hardness of the Philips, conveys almost all of the resonance with string instruments that the Mc does. Female vocals have a pronounced sibilence not evident with either of the others and not evident when I use the Sherwood with either the Advents or Klipsch. Have not figured out that one, yet. Piano comes through beautifully as does acoustic guitar. Electric guitar is slightly less distinguishable than with either the Mc or Philips but, also is not as harsh as with the Philips. The soundstage, something I'd not expected, really opened up both in width and front to back. Far better than with the ss systems. The others present a big sound, in fact, the wall of sound that so many experience with big speakers but, the Sherwood got it all in focus - still a big wall but, with dimensionality.
The tuner falls short on pulling power but, I'm comparing it to my Philips and Mc both of which are top line tuners. I've always liked the Sherwood and with some music I like it better than either of the others. Classical especially can be listened to very long term without any fatique. The Mc in this regard is better than the Philips but, the Sherwood is better than the Mc. On jazz, it presents a rather laid back, lazier rendition than with the Mc while the Philips breaths life and energy into the music. I'm finding that a really good system may have to include several tuners as well as turntables or at least cartridges.
Over the next few weeks, I think I'll leave the setup up and running especially trying to address the female vocal issue.
Conclusion: The Mc and Philips both are better overall but not by as large margin as I'd have expected. Factoring in either the original price or current prices, the Sherwood may be the winner for all but the brand maniacs or those with fat wallets. Overall, of the 3, it presents an excellent balance between presentation and price.