In Reply to: Re: Vandersteen's succcess is in balence posted by flex on April 28, 2000 at 19:59:48:
... when the reality is that I offended you by stating an opinion contrary to your own about the Vandersteen's.Now you have the nerve to personalise it on this forum.Not much class,I'd say.
Anyway,I will answer your statement,even tho I don't consider myself particularly qualified to design loudspeakers, I still can recognise problems of coherency. I might suggest Richard try to choose drivers that have more similarly voiced propagating surfaces and perhaps overlap crossover frequencies with more gradual slopes to aid in creating more seamless coherency between his drivers.That might advance his well marketed and highly successful design into the current decade.That is, unless the point is quick sales by a falsley glitzy presentation in a demo.
As you stated in your email:"this is supposed to be fun". Your post was hardly in that spirit.You stated that I sounded "angry".I wasn't before but you've gone a ways in changing that.
Ken
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- i get it now, flex... you e mail me at home complaining about my "tone"... - Ken Lyon 21:48:53 04/28/00 (3)
- Re: i get it now, flex... you e mail me at home complaining about my "tone"... - Rod M 11:19:32 04/29/00 (2)
- Small but very valid points (NT ) - Sean 01:09:47 04/30/00 (1)
- yep, sean, I made a mistake... - Ken Lyon 04:53:49 04/30/00 (0)