07-16-09: Revrob
I guess I was under the impression that the drivers were the most costly and contributes mostly to how speakers sound. Given that revelation couldn't you use cheaper drivers with a great cabinet to get close to the same sound as better drivers?
Whether you use cheaper drivers or a less inert cabinet, you sacrifice linearity and dynamic range. However, driver non-linearities and cabinet resonances sound different, though they both compromise accurate reproduction.
Wilson, Sonus Faber, and Magico are good examples of how important the enclosure is. All three are meticulously engineered to limit or control resonances, and all have extraordinary low level resolution.
Of the three, Wilson cabinets are probably the most rigid and inert, and I think this explains why some people love them and others hate them. Wilsons are so revealing that they absolutely show the differences in upstream electronics and cabling. If they are a bad match, the Wilsons won't sound impressive.
I've heard Watt/Puppies, Maxx 2 and 3's, and Alexandria X-2s on several occasions. When powered by a complete chain of tube electronics ending with powerful tube amps (VTL Ref and ARC), they were extraordinary. When powered by a $40K solid state signal chain, they were OK--impressive, but not as involving as with the tubes.
About 25 years ago when B&W prototyped their first 801 Matrix design (which renders the cabinet much more inert), it revealed non-linearities in their drivers that went previously unnoticed. Result: They had to re-design their drivers to match the neutrality of the matrix enclosures.
