Both the Courante and the Counterpoints are 4 ohm impedance speakers. The minimum impedances are:
Courante 3.9 ohms
Counterpoint 3.8 ohms
Bayz Audio Counterpoint 2.0 >>>>Rhapsody.Audio
- Thread starter Rhapsody
- Start date
Both the Courante and the Counterpoints are 4 ohm impedance speakers. The minimum impedances are:
Courante 3.9 ohms
Counterpoint 3.8 ohms
Lot's of pics and information about the Bayz Courantes in this SixMoons article for those interested in Bayz.
https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/bayz/
https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/bayz/
Srajan finished the article today. It is a great honor for Courante 2.0 to receive the very rare Blue Moon Award, the description of which can be found here:
6moons.com
Audio Reviews – Blue Moon Awards
The full review at 6Moons.com is here:Srajan finished the article today. It is a great honor for Courante 2.0 to receive the very rare Blue Moon Award, the description of which can be found here:
Audio Reviews – Blue Moon Awards
https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/bayz/
6moons continuing to generate business for opticians with their font size and format
No reflection on the product, however, Srajan has the most cumbersome prose on the internet and all that advertising slathered about the content, no thanks.
Yes, there are audio websites that rely on the advertising, to the detriment of the site visitor. The 6-moons site is tremendously difficult to wade through, You really have to be committed. I do greatly enjoy the links to youtube samples of music he (Srajan) mentions within the reviews, that much I appreciate. I’m guessing english is not his first language. But I can appreciate criticism of his prose. Overall, the website though... f’ me it is the opposite of engaging.
I won't normally criticize other publications on format, but I honestly could not get past page 2.
The irony is probably lost on the designer who put this tag at the top of each review page:
The manufacturer probably got copy beforehand as a readable word document. The published version is an unprofessional disservice to reader and manufacturer alike. To say something positive: at least the ads weren't flashing.
Too bad, the speakers look interesting.
To do a review of a product like Bayz, the arrangements, delivery logistics and setup of such a product are neither simple nor inexpensive. Hopefully another publication will take them up.
The manufacturer just watched and excited what Srajan writes day by day.......
The Bayz Courante 2.0 were already reviewed by Dr.Matt Clott for EnjoyTheMusic.com
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/superi...98aUteUUFTSPm7pAvf2RA1mWwIj9QfsMVfJf9H_Z1xyYk
Although not a full Bayz review the Counterpoints were auditioned and subsequently discussed in a Rhapsody.Audio visit report by the Absolute Sound's Dr. Matt Clott here:
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/rhapsody-at-rhapsody
We have sold several sets of Bayz Courantes and Counterpoints. Rhapsody will also, in the near future, have Courantes at our DFW, Portland, West Palm Beach and Palm Desert locations and the Counterpoints at the main Rhapsody.Audio location in Brooklyn.
Last edited:
For those that have a problem with the 6Moons layout, we understand totally, but the 6Moons site/reviews have been like this for 20 years, no enlightenment going on here with regards to 6Moons and their business/site design approach.
With that being said I have three Bayz sales in process and all of these buyers understand the 6Moons site and review methodology. For these actual Bayz buyers they were willing to comb through the 11 page review as S thoroughly investigated the Bayz Courantes even in different rooms.
I have been told by these Bayz buyers that as cumbersome as the review might be to read for many, they really appreciated the effort that was put into the review. It was very helpful to them.
So even though the review doesn't work for many, which is totally understandable, it does work for serious buyers of Bayz speakers. My suggestion, with no disrespect to anyone, if it bothers you just don't read it.
With that being said I have three Bayz sales in process and all of these buyers understand the 6Moons site and review methodology. For these actual Bayz buyers they were willing to comb through the 11 page review as S thoroughly investigated the Bayz Courantes even in different rooms.
I have been told by these Bayz buyers that as cumbersome as the review might be to read for many, they really appreciated the effort that was put into the review. It was very helpful to them.
So even though the review doesn't work for many, which is totally understandable, it does work for serious buyers of Bayz speakers. My suggestion, with no disrespect to anyone, if it bothers you just don't read it.
Thank you for the “enjoy the music” review link. So much easier to read than the 6-Moons site.
<soapbox on>
Having returned to the hobby just shy of 15 years ago, I’ve stumbled on the 6-Moons site many times. I’ve read a number of reviews, but all are a slog to wade through. I started my time in the tech world at Microsoft when Internet Explorer was in v.2, and when HTML allowed everyone to post content to the web. And just as “desktop publishing” allowed everyone to create newsletters, the folks who worked in print media cringed when they experienced the aesthetic results. I was fascinated by the little Macintosh computers, Aldus PageMaker, and Adobe Postscript which allowed for genuine, professional level production, for those who would take the time to learn, at least, the fundamentals of good design. The world of HTML has been similar, and for a time, before advertising crept into every nook and cranny of the web, there were some exceptionally pleasing and creative websites. Sadly, those are fewer and fewer and there is a gross homogeneity of the web these days. News sites are the worst, with click-bait popping up, videos that auto-play, even some that will pop back on-screen if you try to scroll past them. I fear we are headed towards the sci-fi world of hologram advertising appearing everywhere—even on your bedroom ceiling...
“Good morning Bob, this sunrise brought to you by Folgers, Gillette, and Brooks Brothers”
Monetizing sites I completely understand and accept. But Tim‘s comment about the irony of “for audiophiles who love to read” floating atop the 6-moons site is, as they say, priceless!
</soapbox off>
<soapbox on>
Having returned to the hobby just shy of 15 years ago, I’ve stumbled on the 6-Moons site many times. I’ve read a number of reviews, but all are a slog to wade through. I started my time in the tech world at Microsoft when Internet Explorer was in v.2, and when HTML allowed everyone to post content to the web. And just as “desktop publishing” allowed everyone to create newsletters, the folks who worked in print media cringed when they experienced the aesthetic results. I was fascinated by the little Macintosh computers, Aldus PageMaker, and Adobe Postscript which allowed for genuine, professional level production, for those who would take the time to learn, at least, the fundamentals of good design. The world of HTML has been similar, and for a time, before advertising crept into every nook and cranny of the web, there were some exceptionally pleasing and creative websites. Sadly, those are fewer and fewer and there is a gross homogeneity of the web these days. News sites are the worst, with click-bait popping up, videos that auto-play, even some that will pop back on-screen if you try to scroll past them. I fear we are headed towards the sci-fi world of hologram advertising appearing everywhere—even on your bedroom ceiling...
“Good morning Bob, this sunrise brought to you by Folgers, Gillette, and Brooks Brothers”
Monetizing sites I completely understand and accept. But Tim‘s comment about the irony of “for audiophiles who love to read” floating atop the 6-moons site is, as they say, priceless!
</soapbox off>
I've actually heard the Courante's and they are quite amazing speaker for what they do well. They fulfill many of my personal sonic priorities. Certainly would be on my short list.
Congratulations, on your success with your representation of them. If audiophiles are serious about them or even curious, you have to listen. No review will help with the investment at this level other than to strike that curiosity.
I was interested enough to click to 6moons just because I wanted to see if my listening impressions aligned at all with the professional review. Personally, I was reminded why I never go there. I'll take your advice on 6moons and stick to it.
The Bayz really take the concept of radiation patterns that some would say are ideal with high efficiency, clever engineering and the latest in materials science and bring it to life - the format of the review does not diminish the qualities of the product.
Cheers,
I´m really wondering that 6moons claims "The result is a lessened difference between recordings".
My experience with the Courante in my room is the exact opposite. I have never heard such vast differences in various music pieces. The way the sonic events are presented are extremely specific to the individual recording venue, reverb, production etc.. Even electronic music sounds very diverse. That´s one of the most striking features of the Courante for me. Strange....
My experience with the Courante in my room is the exact opposite. I have never heard such vast differences in various music pieces. The way the sonic events are presented are extremely specific to the individual recording venue, reverb, production etc.. Even electronic music sounds very diverse. That´s one of the most striking features of the Courante for me. Strange....
Sure. Everyone has such different interpretations of sound with many influences at play.
6Moons layout is terrible. Basically the full-text column-width is greater than any other reading format I can think of, requiring the eyes to travel much too far in the horizontal, particularly in light of the font size and line spacing. Literally the worst for anyone who likes to read, audiophile or not.
That said, my defense of Srajan:
Don't know what Srajan's country of origin is, but native-born Russian Vladimir Nabakov was one of the English language's foremost writers. I see nothing in Srajan's writing to indicate he doesn't have complete command of the language. He writes with a unique (to the audio review world) and complex density that -- combined with the dam'd text layout -- proves impervious to rapid scanning. The standard information one expects from a review is there -- it's just not handed to the reader on a silver platter. Does he seem to get carried away sometimes? Sure! But his stuff never has that "cut-and-paste" effect I so often find in other reviews, where one could virtually substitute any brand name/product for that under scrutiny.
Too many reviews refuse to do more than a cursory comparison -- if any at all -- to components on hand or previously examined. Srajan keeps a stable stable of personal reference components and often goes to great lengths in his comparos, including two very different listening rooms plus, when appropriate, subwoofer augmentation observations and well-thought-out computer and headphone set-ups.
He's very upfront about his personal biases/listening preferences and has described their change/evolution. He's also upfront about how his site is funded and the writers' potential conflicts of interest. Sure, sometimes he seems to use verbiage to bury the lede on a negative experience, but at least the gear purveyors know what they're getting into at the outset. I always get a laugh when I read reviews elsewhere that conclude what was obviously a poor showing with "should be auditioned by anyone considering blah, blah, blah..."
The Blue Moon Award seems a much more valuable tool for audio excellence than some of the "Participation Trophies" that seem to comprise some of the other Best-of lists. My main regret is that much of the gear he finds interesting is difficult to come by or flat unavailable for audition in the US. He's an enthusiastic listener who's capable of portraying subtle differences in sound in ever-unique prose. He's not going to be the source for reviews of mega-systems (the Bayz has to be one of the most expensive subjects he's personally tackled, though some of the other writers have published on high-dollar gear), but he's a great resource for relatively affordable and often off-the-beaten-track audio exploration.
Parker
That said, my defense of Srajan:
Don't know what Srajan's country of origin is, but native-born Russian Vladimir Nabakov was one of the English language's foremost writers. I see nothing in Srajan's writing to indicate he doesn't have complete command of the language. He writes with a unique (to the audio review world) and complex density that -- combined with the dam'd text layout -- proves impervious to rapid scanning. The standard information one expects from a review is there -- it's just not handed to the reader on a silver platter. Does he seem to get carried away sometimes? Sure! But his stuff never has that "cut-and-paste" effect I so often find in other reviews, where one could virtually substitute any brand name/product for that under scrutiny.
Too many reviews refuse to do more than a cursory comparison -- if any at all -- to components on hand or previously examined. Srajan keeps a stable stable of personal reference components and often goes to great lengths in his comparos, including two very different listening rooms plus, when appropriate, subwoofer augmentation observations and well-thought-out computer and headphone set-ups.
He's very upfront about his personal biases/listening preferences and has described their change/evolution. He's also upfront about how his site is funded and the writers' potential conflicts of interest. Sure, sometimes he seems to use verbiage to bury the lede on a negative experience, but at least the gear purveyors know what they're getting into at the outset. I always get a laugh when I read reviews elsewhere that conclude what was obviously a poor showing with "should be auditioned by anyone considering blah, blah, blah..."
The Blue Moon Award seems a much more valuable tool for audio excellence than some of the "Participation Trophies" that seem to comprise some of the other Best-of lists. My main regret is that much of the gear he finds interesting is difficult to come by or flat unavailable for audition in the US. He's an enthusiastic listener who's capable of portraying subtle differences in sound in ever-unique prose. He's not going to be the source for reviews of mega-systems (the Bayz has to be one of the most expensive subjects he's personally tackled, though some of the other writers have published on high-dollar gear), but he's a great resource for relatively affordable and often off-the-beaten-track audio exploration.
Parker
Well, I guess I have Sjraen to blame for 12 years of Zu ownership. His championing of the brand in the mid/late-2000s brought them to my attention and got me interested.
Similar threads
