Horn based loudspeakers why the controversy?

Except music with a 5 string bass at 31hz for the low B, percussion overtones, pianos, the ambient sound around live orchestras, life...etc....

Well. life is not music, but yes, there are a fair number of sources for below 40Hz bass. Still, a lot of popular music is excluded. Being that reviewers often listen to classical, pipe organ, and such as references, it's perplexing as to why so many confuse the 2nd octave for the first. I realize speakers often get some reinforcement in way of room placement, but still, many "budget" floorstanders don't produce anything useful below 35Hz. I'd rather have a speaker that sacrifices everything below 40Hz in exchange for tactile and defined bass above that - which is what you get with Klispch Heritage.

Gawdbless,

Strumenti Acustici de Precisione no longer exists, but the owner/designer, Vincenzo Fratello,  has a new company called DolceVita Audio.  It is even harder to find references to that company.  A dealer in my Northern Virginia area, Deja Vu Audio, heard the new lineup of speakers in Italy and plans to bring it into his shop when production commences.  I don't think there are any horn designs in the new lineup, but, the speakers are probably worth hearing; this particular dealer makes custom horn speakers from vintage and new parts and is very much in tune to the sound of horn-based systems.  

The Oris horn, using full-range drivers as mid to upper frequency drivers is a very promising approach.  Used that way, many such drivers sound much smoother and natural than as truly full range drivers.  I have heard Lowther, AER and Feastrix and cheap Tang Band drivers used this way and the systems sounded quite good. 

The only time I heard a full-range driver sound great without any other drivers is the Charney Audio back-loaded horn--a quite amazing system give that it sounds good, looks presentable, does not take up much room and is very reasonably priced.   I've heard the Charney with a Voxativ driver and an AER driver (I like the AER more because it sounded smoothly extended in its top range).  The Voxativ full range systems (of course using their drivers) sound good too, but I'll still take the Charneys.

I completely agree that speakers like the Heresy IIIs I have been enjoying are perhaps the most coherent I've heard to their 58hz or so limits (there is bass below that point of course, but not in the same tonal or dynamic ballpark)...very clean, accurate, and impactful bass in that range, utterly enhanced by 2 carefully adjusted subs. I just looked up the aforementioned Charney speakers and man...beautiful craftsmanship and nice ideas...Maybe I'll hear 'em at a show sometime.

Greg Timbers (of JBL) on the evolution of loudspeakers, and how you really can’t fool physics nor the importance of efficiency:

How has the sound of speakers changed over the years? Many yearn for the speakers of the past over those of today… what has changed? Distortion, materials, focus on sound characteristics?

- Speakers have generally become smoother, more 3-dimensional and much smaller. This means that they are less dynamic on the whole and rather toy like compared to good stuff from the 60s and 70s. Unlike electronics, miniaturization is not a good thing with loudspeakers. There is no substitute for size and horsepower. Nothing much has changed with the laws of physics in the last 100 years so what it takes to make dynamic life-like sound is unchanged. There have been some advances in magnet materials and a bunch of progress in adhesives but not much else. The cost of a 70s system in today’s economy would be considered unaffordable and the system would be deemed unnecessarily huge. The large highly efficient systems of old came at a time when 15 – 30 watts of power was the norm. Today’s stuff would choke on those amplifiers. Now that power is cheap, size and efficiency has been thrown out the window because you can always apply more power. Unfortunately, more power does not make up for lack of efficiency. Today’s speakers range between 0.1% to maybe 0.5% in efficiency. (On a good day) 60s and 70s stuff was more like 1% to 10%. With most of the losses gong to heat, turning up the power on a small system with small voice coils and poor heat management is definitely not equivalent to a large high efficient speaker.

It is true that the response of many of the old systems was a bit ragged and generally less attention was put in the crossover networks because simplicity generally means higher through-put. However, the big Altec’s, JBL’s, Klipsch’s and Tannoys of the day would still fair well today with a little modernization of the enclosures and crossovers.

Today’s multi-channel home theater setups let a bunch of small toy loudspeakers and a sub or two sound pretty big and impressive to the average Joe. I think speakers have mostly become a commodity and small size and price are what counts the most now. The few high-end brands left are struggling for market share in this age of ear buds.

https://positive-feedback.com/interviews/greg-timbers-jbl/

Cessaro seems to be one of the most elite horn brand of loudspeakers based on my research.