In Reply to: RE: "I can't see that HP and other reviewers had much to do with it." posted by Pat D on March 3, 2011 at 16:22:02:
as Kef had later speakers which have 104 in the designation, such as 104.2, etc.
You're entirely correct. After the original 104, next came the 104ab. Let's review your comments to which I responded:
My old Kef 104 speakers came out in 1973
You referred to the 104. I too, referred to a review in 1976 of the 104. We both refer to the 104.
"Barton: Yes. I would definitely agree with that. Can I talk about other speakers? It's one that no longer exists, but the original KEF R104aB was very flat on-axis.
You and I spoke of the 104 while Barton speaks of a later revision called the 104ab. Was there any difference?
It would appear that the change involved the crossover. Apparently, they realized their earlier error.
I agree with Barton's remarks on the Kef 104aB
Ok, if that is the case (as opposed to what you originally wrote), then you and HP are referring to different revisions of the speaker. Did that clarify your confusion?
rw
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- You know what - E-Stat 18:13:04 03/03/11 (9)
- RE: You know what - Pat D 19:26:09 03/03/11 (8)
- That's what make the reviews interesting... - mkuller 10:58:19 03/04/11 (7)
- RE: That's what make the reviews interesting... - Pat D 17:14:22 03/04/11 (6)
- If you don't understand ... - mkuller 17:49:38 03/04/11 (5)
- "Trust Your Ears" - kerr 07:03:08 03/06/11 (4)
- Straw man. - Pat D 20:35:57 03/06/11 (3)
- Actually, not a man of any composition - kerr 06:42:39 03/07/11 (2)
- RE: Actually, not a man of any composition - Pat D 08:24:05 03/07/11 (1)
- Ah - thanks! - kerr 09:14:55 03/07/11 (0)