|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
173.77.14.44
In Reply to: RE: Waveform, I believe posted by John Marks on March 21, 2015 at 11:44:24
The final version of the Waveform loudspeaker was reviewed in 1997 (see
link below). In my opinion, it was example of a loudspeaker manufacturer
selling his product below the price necessary to ensure his company's
continued existence.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Follow Ups:
I heard them at Peter Aczel's in the 90s, they sounded very detailed with an exceptional top to bottom coherency. Unfortunately, I did not hear "that magic" that we all chase. It was a very business like, get the job done, loudspeaker. I say it failed mostly on sonics- it was too "measured" perfect. It was also much smaller in person than in photographs. From that era I would choose the big Infinite Slope over the Waveform.
I've had Waveform Mach 17s for nearly 15 years.
Active speakers with an external crossover and 6 channels of separate amplification are a pain but I'm still sold on active speakers. When I replace the Waveforms, I'll try to find speakers with crossovers and amplification inside (or on the back.)
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: