Sonus Faber Venere 2.5

I am always a Sonus
Faber fan.  I like their sound and musicality.  The Venere line represents a more affordable
line for Sonus Faber, but a level of performance above almost anything in the
price range. This pair is in great condition.  A reprint of owner's manual is included.

The Bluebook shows the Private Party $1601.42.  I am asking for $1288 for a quick sale.  

Lately, my buddy moved
into a smaller house and want to find a new home of his giant Sound Lab
speakers.  He ask me to take care them.  This cause me an extra set of speakers in my living
room and my wife want me to sell this pair as she thinks this pair does not
matches with her décor.

SPECIFICATIONS:

- Floor standing, 2.5-way, reflex-loaded
loudspeaker. 

- Drive-units:
1.1" (29mm) fabric-dome tweeter, 7" (180mm) Curv-cone mid/woofer,
7" (180mm) Curv-cone woofer. 

- Crossover
frequencies: 250Hz, 2.5kHz. Frequency response on reference axis: 40Hz–25kHz,
±3dB. 

- Sensitivity: 89dB/2.83V/m. 

- Nominal impedance: 6
ohms. 

- Recommended
amplification: 40–250W into 8 ohms on unclipped program. 

Dimensions: 43.2"
(1107mm) H by 13.3" (340mm) W by 17" (437mm) D. Weight: 42.8 lbs
(19.45kg).

Here is a review from Stereophile by Kalman Rubinson  |  Nov 1, 2013 If this is what you like then this is a pair for you.:

Sound

Getting down to the nitty-gritty—not that there was anything gritty about these
speakers—the 2.5s were superb in their rendering of voices and solo
instruments. Renée Fleming singing Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah," from
her Dark Hope (CD, Decca 80014186-2), sounded as creamy-rich as I
have heard her through speakers costing several times as much as these—and
Marianne Beate Kielland's voice in her Come Away, Death (in a free
24-bit/192kHz PCM download; SACD/CD, 2L 2L-064-SACD) seemed to be suspended in
the space above my center speaker—which, of course, was not even connected.
Deeper voices, too, were rendered with a natural balance aided, to a degree, by
the richness of the 2.5's midbass. I further tested this by playing Paavo
Järvi's wonderful recording of Fauré's Requiem, with soprano Chen Reiss,
baritone Matthias Goerne, and the Chorus and Orchestra of Paris (BD, Euroarts
2058874), as well as the other Fauré works on this marvelous concert disc. In
the Requiem, as well as the familiar but delicious Pavane (in
its relatively unfamiliar version with chorus), there was a remarkable
congruence between the voices in the soundstage and the performers on the real
stage. Voices were coherent, and the sibilance was quite natural. And, yes, I
did remember to choose the stereo PCM track—all the magic I heard was coming
from the musicians and the Venere 2.5s.

Since
none of those pieces make significant demands in the bass or is strongly
dynamic, I had to pull out stronger medicine: for both bass and dynamic range,
Britten's Sinfonia da Requiem, with Carlos Kalmar conducting the
Oregon Symphony (SACD/CD, Pentatone PTC 5186 393), which spans the range from
eerily wispy strings to violent, brass-prominent tuttis, and includes some
magnificent bass-drum wallops. The Veneres delivered it all without strain or
compression; the impression was simply staggering, even in plain ol' stereo.
Getting to the bottom of it all, the title track of Béla Fleck's Flight
of the Cosmic Hippo (CD, Warner Bros. 26562-2) was satisfyingly
weighty, as was Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon (SACD/CD, Capitol
CDP 582136 2), the latter benefiting from the Veneres' hugely wide dynamic
range capability. Indeed, I didn't think that adding subwoofers would markedly
enhance the experience of either of these favorite recordings—until I switched
them in. By now, I should know better.

I spent a lot of time listening
to high-resolution PCM and DSD files through the Venere 2.5s, and my impression
was that the speakers were capable of delivering in detail the subtleties those
recordings contain. Using the Sonus Fabers to directly compare the 16/44.1 and
24/96 releases of a number of albums from M•A Recordings, many of which I hold
in high regard, revealed my consistent preference for the Sonus Fabers'
natural, relaxed sound throughout the midrange, which served to disambiguate
the sounds of the instruments from the acoustic of the venue without
disconnecting them. It's the sound one hears in a good hall, where the
attention can focus on the music without being distracted by the nonetheless
essential ambience.

The
ability of the Venere 2.5s to present a balanced and integrated midrange and
treble was also an advantage when I used them as the main L/R speakers of a
multichannel array. Despite the mismatch with the other speakers, the sound
with the Veneres was distinctly more open and "large" than the sound
of my matched system. And while the Veneres certainly had more treble energy,
there was no accompanying brightness or highlighting.

Going
further afield, I also had the Veneres in the system when I was evaluating the
Trinnov MC Optimizer, which I used to EQ the Veneres and the supporting
Paradigm speakers, as well as remap all of the speakers' virtual positions to
the theoretical ideal. The EQ'd Veneres simply "disappeared" as
identifiable sources in two-channel mode, the music approaching the ease,
balance, and openness of a live concert. And since the Trinnov did an amazing
job of matching the 2.5s with the Paradigm Studio 60 in the center,
multichannel presentation was eminently satisfying. But regardless of the
number of channels or the use of EQ, the Veneres took complete advantage of the
blandishments of hi-rez DSD and PCM files. They greatly exceeded what the
Paradigms could do on their own—and, indeed, what I have ever heard from this
system in this room.

So,
yes—the SF Venere was both more revealing and better balanced than my rather
long-in-the-tooth Paradigms, while also being smoother and more integrated than
the KEF Q900, which I reviewed in September 2011. Looking further back
through the haze of memory at other speakers I've reviewed here in Connecticut,
I also think the Sonus Faber was more dynamic than the PSB Imagine T (reviewed in June 2009). So, allowing for any
weakness in my powers of remembrance of speakers past, I suspect that the only
ones I've enjoyed as much as the Venere 2.5 were the Canton Vento Reference 9
DC (March 2008) and the Revel Concerta F12 (July 2006). The Cantons are stand-mounted
monitors ($4000/pair in 2008), and the Revels ($1498/pair in 2006) are simply
dowdy in comparison to the stylish Sonus Fabers.

Conclusions

I loved the Sonus Faber Venere 2.5s. They sounded great with every recording I
threw at them, and performed well with every system configuration I could
manage. They were an ear-opening experience, and their intelligibility and
balance made it brutally clear that I need to step up the quality of my
Connecticut-system speakers to fully appreciate modern high-resolution audio.
Alas, they're too tall to fit under my video display—but don't let that stop
you. The Venere 2.5 is not only provocatively sexy in appearance; it delivers.