XTZ 99.25 grills on or off?

PSM1

Distinguished Member
For absolute sound quality then the speaker grills should be taken off. However, to be honest the difference would be minimal at most. The grills are designed to be as accoustically transparent as possible hence I would no worry too much about it.
If you like the look of them with the grills off and you do not need to worry about protecting the cones (i.e. no kids with inequisitive fingers!!!) then leave them off. If however you prefer them with the grills on then leave them on. It is not really going to make a lot of difference, if any, to your listening pleasure.
 

Dazzor

Well-known Member
Never mind about grills on or off, saguk1234.

Tell me how 5 x 99.25's powered by the rotel combi sounds?

Wish I had room for 2 more 99.25's at the rear:(
 

saguk1234

Well-known Member
Never mind about grills on or off, saguk1234.

Tell me how 5 x 99.25's powered by the rotel combi sounds?

Wish I had room for 2 more 99.25's at the rear:(

They are awesome!!!!! Superb panning from front to back. Superb clarity. The 99.25 at the rear require a serious speaker stand because there aren't many 1m speaker stands with a big top plate. These are much better than my s150/ss150 set-up.
 

Dazzor

Well-known Member
They are awesome!!!!! Superb panning from front to back. Superb clarity. The 99.25 at the rear require a serious speaker stand because there aren't many 1m speaker stands with a big top plate. These are much better than my s150/ss150 set-up.

I'm seriously jealous;)

On the stand front I know what you mean. I bought a pair of SoundStyle Z2's for my front 2. The top-plates are too small really but with a bit good old Blu-tac on each corner (Decoupling also) they are very steady.

I was going to send the stands back as the spec on the site I bought them from was totally incorrect, but once I got the blu-tac thing going on I kept them as they do look nice on the Z2's I think.

Out of interest, how much bangers and mash would I have to part with if wanted the Rotel 1570/1575?

Cheers
D
 

Dazzor

Well-known Member
Yeah, did that and didn't really get much up....However, done searches on the two separately and it looks like that little duo would set me back about £2950 in total.

I shall be sticking with my humble Z7 for now, it's more than enough for me in my current listening room.

Oh, and FYI, I keep the grills on, just like the minimalist-look and personally can't really hear much difference, maybe an infinitesimally small difference....Maybe.

All the best
D
 

BlueWizard

Distinguished Member
Do they sound better with the grills on or off?

Well, we seem past the basic question now, but I can't resist a snarky reply.

With Kids = Grills On
Without Kids = Grills Off

With Idiot Friends = Grills On
Without Idiot Friends = Grills Off

Lots of company = Grills On, except when showing them.
Little company = Grills Off, except when that little company is made up of idiots.


Oddly, in my house, I have one pair on the left with the grills off, and the other pair on the right with the grills on. I like to keep my speakers protected, but I like to look at the drivers too. This half on/half off wasn't intensional, it just ended up that way.

Steve/bluewizard
 

mickbirch2000

Well-known Member
I have very recently bought 3 x 99.25's, a stereo pair & centre for 5.1 home cinema/SACD, DVD-A set-up with Denon AVC-A10SE amp. They have replaced Quad 11L speakers, I still have 4 x Kef pods for side/rear duty & an old REL storm sub. I am very pleased with the way they are able to resolve more detail especially in music & they seem more holographic & able to project a big 3D soundstage with the right material. The quality of the drivers really shines thro & the value for money even now seems exeptional.
I prefer to use the 99.25's with the grills fitted but found whilst running a set-up DVD-A disk using low frequency signal to each speaker in turn that I was getting a buzz/rattle from one speaker in particular but all 3 with the volume turned up slightly more. this turned out to be linked to the grills & when they were removed completely disapeared. I subsequently found I could re-fit the grills as long as I didnt push them all the way home & can only think that a mode of my room was excited by a particular frequency which caused a greater than normal excursion of the SEAS driver cone/suspension.
The speakers are against the back wall as close as you can get without making contact, with foam bungs inserted & the room is fairly standard approx 17'x12', floor & ceiling is concrete & walls dry-lined plasterboard with plenty of soft furnishings, carpet curtains etc.
The speakers are set to small in the AV amp set-up & also in the Denon 2900 which is used more or less exclusivly for SACD & DVD-A music these days.
So beware pushing the grills fully home, if my experience is anything to go by the cut-out in the grill isnt sufficient in some cases for the SEAS driver cone suspension to clear when driven hard at low frequency.
Apart from that small problem that was easily sorted I am over the moon with the results & did not expect such a step change in musicality over the Quads which themselves are good speakers.
Excellent with films too:thumbsup:
 

kbfern

Distinguished Member
That's interesting that you upgraded from the Quad 11L and that you are pleased with the results.

In my lounge setup I am running 11L's as the front L&R in a 7.1 setup and am very happy with them since I got them new 3-4 yrs ago now.

I have always lusted after the 99.25/6 and would be interested to find how they sound tonally against the Quads.The XTZ like the quads seem to benefit from a good 100 hr + run in period so are yours run in yet.

As you are happy with them do you consider them to be a very good step up or just marginal step up and are they warmer or brighter in tone with music and movies.

I would consider getting 3 like you later in the year and continue to use the existing back and surrounds which are fairly neutral in tone.

My lounge unlike yours is quite bright tonally as the floors are wood with leather furniture and a large glass patio door,although I do have heavy curtains that are closed at night which improves things a bit.

I am trying to gauge how much of an upgrade the 99.25's are against the 11L as the Quads were an exceptional speaker for the £200 they cost and am I going to get the same feeling of a bargain paying nearly 3 times the price per pair for the XTZ's.
 
Last edited:

MI55ION

Distinguished Member
Oddly, in my house, I have one pair on the left with the grills off, and the other pair on the right with the grills on. I like to keep my speakers protected, but I like to look at the drivers too. This half on/half off wasn't intensional, it just ended up that way.

Steve/bluewizard

:rotfl:
 

mickbirch2000

Well-known Member
That's interesting that you upgraded from the Quad 11L and that you are pleased with the results.

In my lounge setup I am running 11L's as the front L&R in a 7.1 setup and am very happy with them since I got them new 3-4 yrs ago now.

I have always lusted after the 99.25/6 and would be interested to find how they sound tonally against the Quads.The XTZ like the quads seem to benefit from a good 100 hr + run in period so are yours run in yet.

As you are happy with them do you consider them to be a very good step up or just marginal step up and are they warmer or brighter in tone with music and movies.

I would consider getting 3 like you later in the year and continue to use the existing back and surrounds which are fairly neutral in tone.

My lounge unlike yours is quite bright tonally as the floors are wood with leather furniture and a large glass patio door,although I do have heavy curtains that are closed at night which improves things a bit.

I am trying to gauge how much of an upgrade the 99.25's are against the 11L as the Quads were an exceptional speaker for the £200 they cost and am I going to get the same feeling of a bargain paying nearly 3 times the price per pair for the XTZ's.

My 99.25's are not fully run in yet, they have had approx 30 hrs of use & the sound has been improving gradually.
As you say the Quad 11L is a very very good speaker at its price point & I was always impressed with the way they performed but the XTZ 99.25 is in another league, they have more slam when used for movies & are able to resolve more detail without sounding shouty or overbright.
My Denon AVC-A10SE is a very good AV amp both for movies & SACDs etc & has a very sweet sound, similar in a lot of ways to a Krell amp so its not as detailed & bright as some & my lounge has a lot of soft furnishings so the extra detail from the 99.25s suits my set-up, the fact that you can tune the response with the tweeter level setting & tame the bass with the foam bung has also been very good for me.
The character of the sound (warm/bright) is very similar to the Quads generally but as I said before the 99.25s reveal more without sounding overbright, they have more slam when called upon & can throw out a very holgraphic expansive stage which works particularly well with good surround material be it music or movie.
I am very pleased with the upgrade & only wish I'd bought the speakers when the exchange rate was more favourable last year but even at £900+ for the 3 they are a bargain in my view.
Hope this helps you decide.
 

saguk1234

Well-known Member
I think I will leave the grills on as I am worried about where I will store them so that they don't get damaged!

Some people shot me down when I said that these are better than my M&K s150/ss150.

I would say that the 99.25 require powerful amps to run them at their best. The Rotel 1575 should be running at 500w x 5 in 4 ohms when running these speakers.
 

saguk1234

Well-known Member
Because they think that m&k are expensive (therefore the best), good rep, best in the world for home cinema, etc. And they think:- xtz! who are they??? Therefore I am unwilling to try them.
 

Dazzor

Well-known Member

Blimey! You started something there with that thread:devil:

I'll never understand how some folk can have such vehement opinions based on NOT actually listening to any given speaker:confused:

All I know is I'm very happy with my 99.25's. I'm sure there's many speakers that others will prefer and that's all well and good..."It takes different stokes" and all that.;)

Did you ever hook-up the S150's to the Rotel combi or did you sell them before you got a chance?
 
Last edited:

HiFiRuss71

Distinguished Member
Personally, I find them slightly better with the grills off, particularly with female vocal and stringed instruments. They just sound a touch smoother with less sting to the upper mid/low treble.

I can't tell one way or the other with movies.

Russell
 

BlueWizard

Distinguished Member
In terms purely of sound quality, you want the grills off.

In the DIY forums I frequent, people carefully sculpt the fronts of their cabinet, precisely rounding the edges to prevent edge diffraction. Then blow the who thing by adding grill frames that have massive edge diffraction. I'm surprised people haven't put more effort into devising way to solve this problem.

But whether professional or amateur, grill frame are a real problem for a purist.

But, until someone comes up with a better way, we are stuck with standard grill frames.

Now some are concerned that the grill cloth can cause problems, but that is really the least of your worries. Grill cloth can be very transparent, and if not, it can be compensated for in the speaker design.

But in the end, it gets down to the user having to make a decision regarding two conflicting choices -

Safe = grills on
Good sound = grills off

What is more important, and what is the more critical factor, keeping your speakers safe from damage, or getting the best possible sound?

I think the answer is based on how many idiots there are in your life; no offense intended. Lots of idiots around, go for safety. Lots of respectful people with heaps of common sense, go for sound.

As to the S150 vs 99.25, those are two very different speakers, and it would never occur to me to compare them. They are VERY different in price, and very different in intended use. I can't think of any circumstance where I would be tempted to substitute one for the other.

Now, I might upgrade from one to the other, but only because one was more suited to the new intended purpose than the other.

I really don't see them as speakers to fairly be compared to each other.

Steve/bluewizard
 

saguk1234

Well-known Member
Why can't we compare an old high end speaker with a new up to date speaker? They are both intended to do the same thing and that is to produce sound. I am just trying to show how a "cheap" speaker can out perform a old high end favourite!
 
Last edited:

Smurfin

Distinguished Member
They are VERY different in price, and very different in intended use. I can't think of any circumstance where I would be tempted to substitute one for the other.

Why not?


I really don't see them as speakers to fairly be compared to each other.

Steve/bluewizard

Why? :confused: I'm genuinely perplexed by these comments? (please no "designed for home cinema" comment :D )
 

The latest video from AVForums

Star Wars Andor, Woman King, more Star Trek 4K, Rings of Power & the latest TV, movies & 4K releases
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

JVC adds Filmmaker Mode to latest D-ILA projector firmware
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Bowers & Wilkins launches Px8 headphone
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky set to launch its plug-and-play Sky Stream solution
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Movies Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
AV Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom