|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Do you have any suggestions posted by solive@ix.netcom.com on May 23, 2009 at 18:25:48:
Indeed my comments relate to the far more recent study. As I understand it, the "shuffler" didn't exist fifteen years ago.Wouldn't that be a rather biased test if each loudspeaker required a unique cable, position and amplifier to sound good?
I guess it all depends upon the objective(s). I would consider it a realistic test for how folks really use the speakers in their environments. I think you'll find that considerable performance improvements can be achieved with most any speaker by careful placement and adherence to its design constraints.
Furthermore, a well designed speaker should perform in well in a variety of rooms...
No disagreement there. On the other hand, dipoles typically require different placement than monopole boxes for optimum performance. That has certainly been my experience having owned both. Indifference to the rear wave clearly biases the study towards monopoles.
Given that cosmetic and brand name factors can affect the results, do you have any suggestions as to how consumers might best address that factor in the real world?
edit: If that is what is required, then I don't think the manufacturer will be in business for every long.
Two prominent manufacturers of dipolar speakers I've owned (Magnepan and Sound Labs) have each been around for more than thirty years. Perhaps you have a different definition of longevity in the audio market.
rw
Edits: 05/24/09
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- My mistake - E-Stat 10:39:16 05/24/09 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
