mission m53

Sorry,

I've never heard them.

Hey!

I've heard them once and they sounded very good.
The bass was a bit weak but the sound was bright and very detailed.

Hope this helps.

I originally went to a Hifi dealer close to my parent's home with a box of representative CD's of what I like (film music, jazz, groovy,...)
I had originally the intention to orientate my choice to B&W or JMlab,...
So we started the first hour of test (I had a really nice reseller : Audiovox at Mouscron in Belgium which received me from 20:00 to 22:00)at his personal place on a saturday evening, listening to B&W and Jmlab models, which were approximatively sounding the same.
After one hour I decide to at least try the Mission M53 he had in shop, and then came the "sound" ! We compare it to B&W 202 and JmLab Chorus and were quite surprised how clear and pure the sound was restituted. At some moment we put it on a higher end B&W with a "Lionel Hampton" big band,...and it was surprising how all the instruments were present with the "Mission" speakers and some were almost not there with B&W.
At some moment, the vendor even rechecked his connection to the B&W and even changed the plugs, listening to a such big difference.
From what I have heard it appears that with a DENON amplifier with flat sound (we choose this option because my amplifier at home is Yamaha), the sound reproduction with the "Mission" speakers M53 were bright and clear. Piano sessions of Harry Connick Jr were even resonating as if you were on the scene. His voice was divine, cymbals of Lionel Hampton big band were as if you were there.
With symphonic orchestra from "Out of Africa" the difference were not as distinguishable.

Anyway, I came back from the shop with a different order that what I had in thought originally, but approximatively the same budget.

I wrote this review in october 2002, and I have the
speakers at home from one year by now, driven by
a Yamaha RVX-630.
Everything is fine, I am really happy with my investment,
the speakers behave as expected, the bass range
of the M53 is so wide that adding the m5as for LFE,
would be almost unnecessary (except for movies with
heavy DTS stuff) and for some high-dynamic bass music
CD's I need sometimes to switch off the sending of the
LFE signal from "both (M53s and m5as)" to the M53s only
in order to prevent the bass to spread too much across
the walls ;))

Hope this helps,
Regards,

bz438

mariop, do you have any possibilty to heat them? but after reading bzs posting i asume they are quite good.

Hey sledge!

mariop, do you have any possibilty to heat them?

What's that for? And up to what temperature should the speakers be heated? Until they start burning?


(Don't take that too serious)

rofl!

sorry, should be "hear", I dont cook speakers.

the missions I heard were OK...nothing to write home about and they were connected to a Yahama receiver...
I think Denon is a better match to the missions

Hello,

I first heard the m53's when I went looking to trade-up my Tannoy mx4-M's at the dealer where I had bought them. I wasn't happy with the Tannoys as I found the bass and upper treble deficient - if I turned up the treble control on the Yamaha receiver I had then, the sound would be hard and irritating.

The salesman suggested moving up to the Tannoy Saturn line (with the concentric tweeter and midrange/bass drivers). In the same room, he had the m53's as well as a Celestion model in the same price range. He put on an instrumental jazz CD for comparison purposes. After switching back and forth, I found the Missions to have the most realistic sound of the bunch - clear, dynamic and open.

When I visited another Mission dealer with my brother to get his opinion, the salesman placed the m53's out in front of their other models, about 5 feet apart, for the demo - and they sounded terrible! I realized then how important placement can be. When we moved them back, spaced apart more, they were much better; however, we were in a large, open sales area, not in a room like when I first heard them, so the acoustic environment was poor.

I later decided to buy the speakers based on my first comparison, and have not regreted it. The most obvious improvement was on a Van Morisson CD, which I previously thought was poorly recorded/mixed because rim shots on the drums made me wince. Now, the sound was more full and lush.

As I mentioned above, I used to have a Yamaha (2-channel, 80 W/ch) receiver. One member above said he has an RXV-630, which I believe is the "5.1" channel version. I would highly recommend a better, high-current amp. I recently upgraded to a Parasound pre-amp and Rotel power amp (120 W/ch) setup; now the m53's sound much better. The Rush Chronicles CD set sounded lame before, whereas now, the meaty thud of the bass drum is just right. Also, the new (used) electronics have done away with sibilance issues, especially noticeable on Paul Simon's Graceland CD.

As noted by professional reviewer Alvin Gold, the upper treble is a bit rolled-off (not nearly as much as with the mx4-M's, though), so I have the treble turned up on the pre-amp. Since it has a tone defeat feature for more direct pre-amplification, I might try brighter sounding interconnects or speaker cables in the future to compensate; for now, life with the m53's is ... a good thing!

maybe you are now used to hearing sibilances from the tannoy's so you find the treble low....use your system conciously for about a month and believe you me you wont need those bright interconnects or more treble from your pre-amp.

Try toe-in by a further 5 degrees and it will make a difference in your treble.

Hi Manek,

I agree that toeing-in the speakers would increase the treble level in the optimal listening area, since high frequencies are more directional, but I find that the imaging suffers. Right now, they are toed-in about 25 degrees, resulting in a spacious soundstage.

I have had the Missions for about 3 months, so the Tannoys are now a distant memory, but their main problem (I felt) was that vocals sounded like the singer had a hand cupped over his/her mouth. With the m53's, vocals are much better, but I like to hear the natural sibilant sounds of S's and C's, without distortion or exaggeration, so the treble does have to be turned up a bit on my system. If anyone has any other suggestions, please write. Thanks.


PS: I read in a Tannoy white paper (regarding their pricey supertweeter) that sibilance in the human voice can reach frequencies of over 30KHz; and while our ears cannot hear that high, the superposition of these waves over audible ones changes the shape of the latter, in the same way that high frequency harmonics give instruments their characteristic sound waves, and as a result, we can distinguish one instrument from another.

chnaging cables might effect your bass or mids...you will have to find a cable with the same mid and high resolution with a brighter top end....

again the combo of interconnects and speaker cables will be critical

I have own the m53s for about a year now, and I think it’s generally a fairly good loudspeaker for the price, which is very good for movies. As per music, the m53 may be not at its best for Bach, Handel, Mozart and Beethoven, but it’s very exciting when listening to Berlioz, Mahler, Richard Strauss and Wagner. For string orchestral music the Tannoy Saturn S8, in my opinion, sounds a bit smoother. However, the way m53 handling the music from a string orchestra is not noticeably unacceptable.

WRC

I have heard many missions and to be honest they have not impressed me at all....they all gave me ear fatigue within half hour including m53. Their tonal balance is just not right...best with HT and not stereo.

I agree that the m53 is not an ideal choice for music and I would go with Tannoy's Saturn S8 if it were not that expensive. I believe the S8 should not be more than 30% over the price of the m53 however, unfortunately, it is just over-priced.