In Reply to: Two GREAT Loudspeakers: One sounds "Wrong," One sounds "Right..." posted by Rich H on September 18, 2001 at 08:57:40:
Please note I write this at work with some Dunlavy SM-1's about two feet from me. They are driven by a cheap AIWA system, but still sound good. If I crank it up early in the morning when no one else is at work and lean back a bit, the sound is quite enjoyable and there is some serious soundstaging going on.I agree with you in that the frequency response of a speaker doesn't tell the whole story. I have both a set of unbelievable Dunlavy Millenniums and a set of Paradigm Studio 100's. Even though the Studios have a respectable frequency response, they just don't hold a candle to the Millenniums. Part of it, I believe, is the decay of the speakers. Dunlavy's have very good waterfall plots. That is, if a tone is fed to a speaker and then suddenly cut off, how long does the speaker take to become silent? This effect gives the speaker a certain cleaness or quickness. Transients are cleaned up, overhang is gone, the speaker seems quicker and cleaner, you have to hear it for yourself.
You also mentioned the single pole crossover. This sure makes sense, that you want accurate responses to quick transient events. But I never heard before that single pole crossovers cause higher IM distortion. One would think single pole crossovers are necessary for good imaging but they aren't. However all single pole corssover speakers are notable for their imaging, Meadowlark, Vanderstein, Thiel and Dunlavy. So it must really help.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Misc observations - Brian A 12:03:07 09/19/01 (5)
- Re: Misc observations - Rich H 15:49:46 09/19/01 (4)
- Re: Misc observations - Brian A 16:26:49 09/19/01 (3)
- Re: Misc observations - Rich H 19:54:17 09/19/01 (2)
- Re: Misc observations - Brian A 08:38:58 09/20/01 (0)
- Re: Misc observations - David Aiken 01:55:21 09/20/01 (0)