RE: Rich, you're missing the point

Posted by RGA (R) on March 26, 2012 at 01:32:50

In Reply to: RE: Rich, you're missing the point posted by josh358 on March 24, 2012 at 14:25:41:

Well here I do agree - The very big panels sound good (some) - unfortunately to me the smallest good panel that I have heard is the Prince II from King Sound - I liked it better than the 20.1 or the Quads which both cost significantly more money. And the Prince II is too large for most people. The smaller panels over the years for me don't cut it.

Of course massive panels have some dynamics and drive - they're finally covering enough area to move some air. This is also the reason dynamic speakers get better in general the bigger they are - but they give up cohesiveness which is a bad trade-off.

Man you and your panel guys must deal with the WORST dealers on the planet. Makes me wonder why you buy panel speakers from hopeless buffoons running the stereo shops you guys go to.

Soundhounds in Victoria BC carries all the Magnepan models, Quad, FInal Sound and used to carry Martin Logan, Acoustat, Apogee.

Please illustrate to me which of the following amplifiers that they carry the top of the line power amplifiers from don't have enough power to drive panels

Ayre Acoustics
McIntosh
Classe,
Sim Audio
Bryston
YBA
Rotel

Most of these have amps capable of 400 + watts into 4 ohms or stable to 2 ohms and some from Classe are 1200 watts into 4 ohms. You can't tell me not a single amp from any of these can't drive a Magnepan when Magnepan uses a 40 watt receiver. If professional installers who have the reps from the speaker makers out there to help can't set them up then why would John Q audiophile with no expertise do a better job?

The people can hear them at the dealer just fine. If you have lousy dealers then why even go? You may as well just order off e-bay.

Listen to Nightwish, The Evil Nine, or Slipknott on a good stereo - if it sounds compressed - it's your system not the speakers. I noticed you played the youtube clip and then judged the recording - really? C'mon - youtube is garbage - it's basically to determine if you'll like the artist and should in no way be used to evaluate the recording quality.

To be clear my first choice of music playback is acoustic well recorded classical music - I am happy to skip the hard metal stuff - and go to something really easy - The Moonlight Sonata - hardly a difficult piece.

The 20.1 with Classe's 1200 watts (a $15,000 loudspeaker) with the amp that has to be fairly pricey (don't know retail). They don't measure up on this piano recording with a number of Soundhounds' boxed speakers (speakers, incidentally, that sell for less than half the price - and with amplifiers for far less money) - it's no contest really. I remember sitting in the big room listening to Jackson Browne's Acoustic Vol 2 which I just heard on a SET/Boxed system in their basement room - it was quite wonderful. Then listening to the 20.1 it was depressing - the sparkle had gone the depth had gone the life had gone. I looked over at one of their salesmen with that look of "what the hell is that" and all he could do was laugh and say "we know."

Everyone there, and that's not hyperbole, who sells them, repairs them, to the owner of the store - also agree. But forget the boxes (a lot of boxes sound just as dead and unyielding in their boringness and most of them get class A ratings and 5 star award tags - I kind of joke that they should be toe tags cause hanging out with the dead would be more entertaining.

Quad sounds so much better on classical acoustic music. Sure the 20.1 has more bass and can play louder - but in every other way (all the more important ways) the Quad sounds better on classical. So does Soundlab, and my brief encounter with King Sound. To me there is no comparison. I totally get the 1.7 - no stats for the money - great - but at $5k? At $15k? C'mon - electrostat is the only way to go if I were to buy a panel

The Soundlab U-1 FWIW sounded very good (as I recall way back on massive monoblock tubes (maybe Lamm I can't remember). They make a compelling case for people with rooms that will support them. Which isn't mine unfortunately. Still for a massive room - spare no expense - Acapella would be an interesting option.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - A question for reviewers - Mike K 09:52:03 03/13/12 (40)

RE: A question for reviewers - paulmah@hotmail.com 12:53:51 04/25/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - Bill the K 20:25:52 03/15/12 (0)

I'm not a reviewer, but... - pbarach 14:33:17 03/15/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - John N 07:58:27 03/15/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - RGA 00:48:36 03/15/12 (24)

Not my experience - E-Stat 06:19:12 03/15/12 (18)

RE: Not my experience - RGA 19:00:19 03/15/12 (17)

Those - E-Stat 19:17:20 03/15/12 (16)

RE: Those - RGA 03:33:05 03/16/12 (15)

RE: Those - josh358 14:04:10 03/20/12 (2)

RE: Those - RGA 01:44:31 03/21/12 (1)

RE: Those - josh358 06:58:46 03/21/12 (0)

Sorry - E-Stat 07:07:32 03/16/12 (11)

RE: Sorry - RGA 21:01:30 03/16/12 (10)

Rich, you're missing the point - E-Stat 06:11:02 03/17/12 (9)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - RGA 23:22:12 03/19/12 (8)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - josh358 14:32:38 03/20/12 (6)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - RGA 20:05:24 03/23/12 (5)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - josh358 14:25:41 03/24/12 (4)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - RGA 01:32:50 03/26/12 (3)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - josh358 06:20:25 03/26/12 (2)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - RGA 02:52:45 03/28/12 (1)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - josh358 19:19:08 03/28/12 (0)

So what you like is simply - E-Stat 06:32:51 03/20/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - rick_m 06:06:10 03/15/12 (4)

RE: A question for reviewers - RGA 18:04:39 03/15/12 (3)

RE: A question for reviewers - rick_m 19:06:16 03/15/12 (2)

RE: A question for reviewers - RGA 03:01:53 03/16/12 (1)

RE: A question for reviewers - rick_m 10:03:08 03/16/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - Inmate51 15:51:57 03/14/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - hahax@verizon.net 20:35:44 03/13/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - John Atkinson 17:34:02 03/13/12 (1)

RE: A question for the editor: - regmac 08:11:07 03/15/12 (0)

RE: A question for reviewers - Inmate51 15:21:58 03/13/12 (0)

I think "never" is an overstatement - John Marks 14:46:58 03/13/12 (1)

RE: I think "never" is an overstatement - Inmate51 16:47:12 03/13/12 (0)

I have about 8 Lps that I always use and about the same number of CDs, but I don't . . . - jnr 13:17:42 03/13/12 (0)

Never? - Stephæn 10:36:35 03/13/12 (0)

Reviewers often have... - mkuller 10:12:22 03/13/12 (1)

RE: Reviewers often have... - Alan Sircom 17:45:07 03/13/12 (0)

Follow Ups

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - RGA 01:32:50 03/26/12 (3)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - josh358 06:20:25 03/26/12 (2)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - RGA 02:52:45 03/28/12 (1)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point - josh358 19:19:08 03/28/12 (0)

RE: Rich, you're missing the point

Post a Message!