AUDIO FORUMS >> Classifieds >> MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII

Message started by mark58 on 05/15/13 at 17:55:48

Title: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by mark58 on 05/15/13 at 17:55:48

I am probably going to order the new Taboo Amp but need guidance on speakers to use with it.  I have not heard either of the speakers above but have read good things here and elsewhere.  Has anyone heard both or one of these....or have any recommendations for speaker choice with this amp.  Thanks, Mark.  PS....tubes are new to me.

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by Rivieraranch on 05/15/13 at 23:01:54

You need an 8 ohm speaker with this amp. Neither one of your choices are.  

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by will on 05/16/13 at 06:57:37

I have been burning in a Taboo MkIII (without a pre amp) on my MG944s. Steve and I discussed this combo (and my HR-1s) for a while. With his excitement about how good the new amp version sounded with speakers as well as headphones, and since I wanted an interesting alternate and backup amp to the Torii, we looked closely at the Taboo. How much do I normally turn up the Torii, room size...speakers, how it compares with the Rachel (I had a SE34), etc. The question of loudness was of course the big one, and it seemed borderline, but no way to know which side of the border it would land on without trying it. Even with the 8 ohm thing (versus 4 ohm for my speakers) and all other things considered, it seemed at the time like a good thing for me to try the Taboo.

And it does seem that volume perception and needs will vary a lot depending on room and personal tastes.

My Torii MkIII is loud, but also feels powerful with both the HR-1s and MG944s (93db and 94db). And my rooms are relatively big. For my listening tastes, in these rooms, and with these speakers, the Taboo just doesn't have enough power for a complete listening experience. Volume-wise, it only begins to get into my lower listening levels before clipping. But also, even at this highest power output level (with software pre and Zstage tuned to highest output without clipping), across various recordings, I don't feel like these particular drivers are being pushed quite enough to get them optimally excited...I am bummed...but these speakers need more power by my ear.

Looks like too many things together are working away from this great amp being optimal for my particular needs...I fell on the wrong side of the borderline......I did not feel this way with the SE34i2+ and the 944s. The 34 was too quiet for me with some DVDs, but great for music as I recall...But now the Torii MkIII has been my reference for a long while, and it most definitely has plenty of power for me, and sounds truly incredible every time I hear it.

I have not heard the Parkers.

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by skiroe on 05/16/13 at 18:07:56

I am running the Taboo with CSP2 using a Creek passive enabling remote volume control and input switching.   Using the MG944's which are well broken in as well as the amp and preamp.   These speakers work beautifully in this set up.  Bass is plentiful as well as a mid range that is clear , articulate and sweet.   The tweeter on these speakers is superlative.  The realism of musical sounds produced by this system  can often surpass my S/S system  which costs more than 3x what is invested in the tube system.   I am going to consider   using a true tube preamp with the S/S system to see if that will bring additional tube flavor.  Currently have a SF line 1 which is hybrid.
BTW-- there is someone selling a pair of 1.5 radials here and I have used those as well with a Zen mono set up..  I would go for them to use with your taboo.   I sold mine for way cheap on here.. less than what is being asked so feel free to haggle with the seller.  He is wanting to sell and I feel would be up to  negotiating.  I was thinking of going for them but am going to wait on possibility going for something higher up in Steve's line.   8-)

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by will on 05/16/13 at 21:41:52

Hey Skiroe,

Sounds like you are getting really good sound. Though clearly this is all subjective, this sounds different enough from my observations that I this a MkIII Taboo? My 944s are also very well broken in, and the Taboo MkIII had about 170 hours with about 2/3 the Esoteric breakin CD and about 1/3 various music, and went through the 5 hour on/5 hour off thing for a it should be showing itself well.

Anyway, aside from any variations in room size, near-field or distant speakers and the usual.....along your particular pre arrangement, our experience is different enough that I am wondering how much variables between an earlier Taboo, and the MkIII might be at play. This could be important in Mark58's considerations.


Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by mark58 on 05/16/13 at 23:06:10

I want to thank all of you for responding.  There seems to be a debate about whether 4 ohm speakers will work well with Decwares lower powered amps..... specifically the New Taboo.  I have looked at all the speakers that Steve offers for sale currently and only the Zen Open Baffle Single Driver speakers are 8 ohms but I'm not able to spend 4 grand on speakers.  All of the Radials... 1.5's, ERRs, and the current HR-1's are also 4 ohm's.  I was hoping to get everything from Steve but I'm not sure that will be possible.  I am so impressed with the flexibility of and user comments for the  New Taboo Mk III that I'm 99% sure I'll have to pull the trigger before the discount ends.  I have read about Omega 3 XRS, 8 ohm, speakers and they go for 1 grand and use a single 5" driver.  $1000 to $1500 for speakers is my budget for now. I am a music lover and not too knowledgeable about the hardware and truthfully only read about it when I'm ready to buy something new about every 15 years after which I just enjoy the music without thoughts of hardware changes.  My listening is very eclectic but it is mainly as follows....small group jazz, vocals (mainly female) these first two account for 80% , classic rock/ folk rock, Big Band jazz, Classical/ Orchestral music fill in the other 20%.  I'm 55 years old and my goal is to enjoy the thousands of albums and CDs I've accumulated and not to attain the Holy Grail of sound....not that there is anything wrong with that...hehe. I'm finding the difficulty is that most of the speakers that would seem to meet  my needs are made by small companies so local auditions can't be done.  By the way I live in the Dallas, Texas area.  Keep the suggestions and personal experiences coming. Thanks again, Mark.

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by skiroe on 05/16/13 at 23:50:17

Looking at the receipt which came with the amp when I bought it from the original owner and it's dated 1/10/11 and states  'Taboo'  so I have to assume that its not a iii or a ii.   Although it seems reasonably  current considering the date.    I'm using tele's el84 ,  Bendix 6106 rectifier and a tele ecc81 input.  the CSP2 is using Bendix 6106 rectifier as well amperex 6dj8's x3.    The room is 10x12 with no sound treatment.   Sometimes I just want to bring this system into the front room although I would not get the volume I would need with a lot of what I play in more "normal" listening hours.   The taboo is later evening nite listening with it left on till 1 or 2 am and then off until the next day.  

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by will on 05/17/13 at 02:15:53


Thanks for the further info. Even if the amps were the same design, it may be that our differences in room size (my main room is 13.5x28x9.5 and extends into other spaces with big openings) and the volume you listen with your Taboo, could explain your being on the good side of the borderline, and me on the not-so-good side. Add in your pres for a little more push..... But I wonder....with the work Steve did to get the Taboo optimally driving Planar headphones, how did this effect (if it did) how the TabooIII drives speakers, and if so, do different resistances (ohms) matter more?????? I don't know.......


I am not sure the low power Decware amps share this particular resistance thing...the Zens are known to drive speakers well below 4ohms. I guess it might be more to do with the design necessary to get the Taboo to do what Steve wanted it to do??

The ohm thing and how it effects sound, and how important matching is, is mysterious to me, and I don't claim to get it. I think it is in part because it depends so much on amp design, rated power and rating system, but also on speaker design and rating systems...and therefore the useful info out there is sort of vague.

Seems if the amp's power components potentials exceed the power output by plenty, there is more room for play without hurting the amp. But basically, ohms rate resistance, so if an amp puts out 8 ohms, and the speakers take 4 ohms, I think this may be like a stream designed for garden hose (8ohm) dropping into a bigger hose (4 ohm equals less the effect is like the same power flowing into a slower/less compressed stream). So this effects how the speakers use the amp power and how the amp power (manipulated by the speaker impedance) effects the sound of the speakers. I hope I got this sort of right. On the other hand, my Torii has a switch for 4 ohm or 8 ohm output, and they both sound great...different, but great. It does have a lot of power behind it though.

Question is, does it matter in your case. I am guessing it might from my experience with the Taboo MkIII and 944s...that I was not getting the 4.5 watts @ 8 ohms output (perhaps not close), and that this is part of what put me on the wrong side of the borderline.

But the bottom line seems to be this. The new Taboo is designed to make the LCD-2s sound as close to the real thing as Steve was able to get, and by reports, this is happening...a musical experience with excellent everything, and without room anomalies! This is a huge accomplishment for LCD-2s and for the Taboo MkIII! No room, and among those of us who have checked it out, there is no debate over how much room effects sound is often a whole lot...enough to hobble some amazingly good gear!!!

The other bottom line to me is that the Taboo MkIII is designed for speakers too, but the power is borderline enough to carefully consider all aspects of what makes it borderline. Speaker proximity, speaker impedance, speaker efficiency and room size all weighing into this. If you could get it all to happen to your advantage, would you dislike that you ended with more than enough power for your listening tastes. Not likely...headroom is a good thing. And if you could get most of it to happen right, you could still be on the right side of the borderline....

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by roncagg on 05/22/13 at 01:55:43

Not sure where you all live, but I have parkers, tekton lores and zu omens that I will hook up to my super zen and other amps for a shootout. I am in SW CT if anyone wants to drop by for a listen. I am the one selling the 1.5s and will definitely negotiate with anyone interested.

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by will on 05/22/13 at 02:57:30

Would love to be there for that shootout, but I am in New Mexico! Do you have a favorite of those three?

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by beowulf on 05/22/13 at 05:14:53

Do you have a favorite of those three?

+1 ... would love to hear your thoughts on each brand!

Title: Re: MG944 vs Parker 95 signature speakers+Taboo mkIII
Post by roncagg on 05/23/13 at 23:26:16

I will share once I have them in-house. I can say now that I have been enjoying the parkers with my spectron amp! Though they were optimized for the superzen it turns out they also love high power. The clarity is a step up from my Gallos, though of course the bass doesn't achieve what the Gallos can.

Forums » Powered by YaBB 2.2.2!
YaBB © 2000-2008. All Rights Reserved.