Marcel, the twin experiences of a radically improved listening room acoustics, combined with vastly increased exposure to classical music in a variety of different spaces (on average a concert every fortnight over 5 years), has totally changed my appreciation of the kind of natural music reproduction that PeterA highlights.
So while my current naysaying friend is obsessed w playing music loudly off his iPod, blasting himself at Muse and Foo Fighters gigs at London Wembley Arena and O2, and turning his subs up, my way more sympathetic friend is really appreciating a greater reproduction of accurate instrumental timbre in its own individual space.
And tbh, my acoustics and a couple of hundred excellent sounding classical concerts since our move up here, has got me totally appreciating this evolution in my sound over the playful cacophony I used to rate in London as my ideal sound.
And the changes I've made in the last 5 years has served this eventual outcome.
Well why should they post their 200 K plus efforts , if those efforts can be easily beaten by some old DIY horns and a cheap Set ,lol
It would only make them look ridiculous
I never heard Stenheim sound great with SS, including with CH Precision. But it sounded great at Axpona with a Swedish tube brand (Enstrom?) and with Enstein OTL
Good amp choices. I would agree that you are leaving behind performance with those speakers going with SS. Funny enough though the company seems to be partnering with this horrid SS amp maker for something active...perhaps for pro use...
Can I suggest you get a less restricted panel? Family and friends are not independent listeners in my perspective. Sometimes I read critics opinions about the sound balance of concerts in different papers and find they disagree a lot. Much more than I could expect.
They might have been sitting in totally different locations and different nights (if it is a multi night engagement)...at least you know your variables with people who sat with you.
I second that Lee .
We could also flip the whole discussion around .
If one doesnt hear what phenolic resin composite materials do with the decay of tones (for example a piano) , or bass definition due to no energy storage in the cabinet , there is something wrong with ones ears .
I m currently designing a new form follows function speaker model (2 versions )
I costs me 3 - 4 times more $$ as if i were to make it from MDF material ( due to material / machining costs and additional drawings - CAD conversions for machining , also preparations before spray painting / polishing are more expensive
Also those MDF manufacturing companies are much easier to find and manufacturing takes less time .
From a visual / quality point of view the material is much more luxurious looking also
Mine look like absolutely new despite being manufactured almost 8 years ago due to the extremely hard material underneath the paint layer .
None of us have heard every component or experienced more than a fraction of the larger audio markets products. Especially the constantly changing programming related to digital. Sticky subject that. Lots of boats tied into a flotilla hoping to avoid being washed over. Not much leaping off waves going on if you catch my drift. HWSNBN still casts a large shadow over here.
In short I think you missed leaping into the digital boat that would've allowed breathing in a particular day's wind at speed. It did wash over you informing a few elegant stories of yachting journeys. Clearly you enjoy getting up on foil when opportunity allows. Which makes me confused how you could think powerboats were meant to outright replace sailing for pleasure. Seeing different wavelengths at similar speeds must be it.
I am not adept at figuring out the analogy that you are using to respond to my prior post. That is not meant as a criticism. There was a time when I drifted in a digital boat but I jumped overboard and swam to land. If I recall, powerboats are supposed to yield to sailboats and neither enjoys having swimmers near by, unless at anchor.
What is the evidence for this? Is this widely-accepted as marketing science fact? (It may very well be; I truly do not know anything about this subject.) Or are you projecting your personal positive bias and negative bias characteristics?
Isn't this the primary function of marketing and publicity, to imprint an initial positive bias in a target audience so they are more likely to consume from you, picking your product from a lineup before any other? I believe this is settled behavioral science and the reason why these areas are big in dollar flux. I see it as just another offer of the market, this one particularly tailored to our inescapable nature.
I spent my entire audio life disliking Wilson Audio speakers because of the metal dome tweeter. The switch to the soft dome tweeter resulted in speakers I personally did not love, but I at least could understand how some people could like them.
According to your assertion I should have had a negative bias towards the XVX. And now, I think, the XVX is my favorite cone speaker I've ever heard. I was expecting it to be a slightly better version of the Alexx. I certainly was not expecting it to wow me the way it has wowed me consistently. I didn't hold a negative bias based on all the years I disliked Wilson speakers.
Fortunately this is the limit of the suggestion and bias derived from marketing: experience. Once you have enough exposure in a pressure free environment you're quite easily able to overcome those bias if enough good evidence is experienced. Otherwise we would all just be drones at the mercy of our marketing overlords
If you have Catholic musical tastes like me, yes.
Certainly my system that excelled at Rush but less so at Ravel, is now opening like a flower on the latter, and a whole new perspective on the former.
Going from a helter skelter all out assault on Rush/Moving Pictures to a presentation revealing the mastering decisions of this album way more than ever before is interesting, and enlightening, in good AND bad ways.
On Ravel, it's all upside, and I've learnt to really value timbral accuracy, tone and the representation of the acoustic space. And listening to live classical to much greater regularity is key to this.
Certainly it's changed my perspective and outlook on all my hoary old prog rock, fusion and electronica chestnuts that never seemed to suffer in my "wall of sound" phase.
I second that Lee .
We could also flip the whole discussion around .
If one doesnt hear what phenolic resin composite materials do with the decay of tones (for example a piano) , or bass definition due to no energy storage in the cabinet , there is something wrong with ones ears .
I m currently designing a new form follows function speaker model (2 versions )
I costs me 3 - 4 times more $$ as if i were to make it from MDF material ( due to material / machining costs and additional drawings - CAD conversions for machining , also preparations before spray painting / polishing are more expensive
Also those MDF manufacturing companies are much easier to find and manufacturing takes less time .
From a visual / quality point of view the material is much more luxurious looking also
Mine look like absolutely new despite being manufactured almost 8 years ago due to the extremely hard material underneath the paint layer .
Many people are so accustomed to 'bloated cabinet sound' that they will need some time to hear the merits of not hearing those effects. Currently I'm rather trying to avoid vibrations and not having to fight them which is IMO a better option than investing heavily in dampening wasted energy. I'm currently using 'thick' aquarel paper for the baffle of the prototype, not saying that dampening has no place in audio..just that there are more ways to skin a cat.
(luckily the room starts to reverberate at the SPL the woofer panel starts to rattle)
Many people are so accustomed to 'bloated cabinet sound' that they will need some time to hear the merits of not hearing those effects. Currently I'm rather trying to avoid vibrations and not having to fight them which is IMO a better option than investing heavily in dampening wasted energy. I'm currently using 'thick' aquarel paper for the baffle of the prototype, not saying that dampening has no place in audio..just that there are more ways to skin a cat.
(luckily the room starts to reverberate at the SPL the woofer panel starts to rattle)
Marcel, it took me a long time to come around to the "sound" of boxes. I mean, meaty, beaty, big and bouncy bass, was something I always loved when younger (my dancing and partying days, RIP), so to hear a totally different bass from the best of cabinet-less panels and ribbons and horns, and the odd OB cones-based spkrs, took some acclimatising too.
Now I wouldn't want to go back.
Many people are so accustomed to 'bloated cabinet sound' that they will need some time to hear the merits of not hearing those effects. Currently I'm rather trying to avoid vibrations and not having to fight them which is IMO a better option than investing heavily in dampening wasted energy. I'm currently using 'thick' aquarel paper for the baffle of the prototype, not saying that dampening has no place in audio..just that there are more ways to skin a cat.
(luckily the room starts to reverberate at the SPL the woofer panel starts to rattle)
It surprises me these guys put a cabinet around the woofer and state of the industry is then trying to fix the problem they created. Sort of trying the best way to get an mp3 to sound like tape. Accepted one is portable and convenient, but you can't fix that problem with wood nor with phenolic resin or any material
May be its a good idea to split WBF up into a Horn section and a section called " other transducers ."
I believe in this way peace and quit can be restored , without the endless / useless discussions.
You simply log in and choose your menu