Douglas-Schroeder, thats funny you forgot the name of your journey ending speaker. |
joejoe,
The post was clearly a parody of the notion that there actually is a "journey ending speaker".
Dave
|
analogluvr,
"
All these so-called advances in materials are mostly bunk. A good old paper driver is still king for musicality."
What you forgot to add is, "For me..."
I just can't understand why some people, and they are mostly analog lovers, think that they have "the best" and everyone should like what they like. It just doesn't work that way.
I bought a pair of Apogee Slant 6s years ago and I have been partial to ribbons and electrostatics ever since.
|
I will second Jond's recommendation of the DejaVu Audio custom speakers. I recently bought a pair using a YL Acoustic midrange horn and compression driver, and they sound very nice in my opinion. However, two days ago I heard two new designs at Vu's store and I was just amazed at how good they sound. So the target is always moving forward.
|
analogluvr326 posts08-05-2017 8:24amCtsooner i'm glad you love your vandersteens but I had to chime in and correct your statements. All these so-called advances in materials are mostly bunk. A good old paper driver is still king for musicality. You can assemble a system with eighty-year-old technology that will sound better than everything at the shows. Now I'm not disputing the fact that material advances have made better capacitors and resistors but as far as in speaker technology I'm not buying.
My system consists of a pair of Oris horns with Fostex drivers and separate tweeters. I have a pair of TAD 15 inch woofers that are separately by amped. The horns and tweeters are run by a western electric 300 B clone and the woofers are run by a sumo Polaris solid-state amp.
I am very familiar with Vander Steen sound having on the pair for numerous years and I have heard your speakers numerous times as well. I'm sure your system sounds very very good and it will probably do a few things better than mine but likewise my system will do a few things better than yours. If all of these advances were so great your modern system should completely obliterate mine with it's 80-year-old technology. Rest assured that would not be happening.
I feel the need to try and correct these types of statements because I feel that they are driven by marketing simply to cause people to spend endless amounts of money and never exit the merry-go-round.
There have been so many versions of the Quatro that its hard to know which one you heard. You are happy with what you have, so often times folks aren't out auditioning or when they do, it's not seriously done. Materials have changed speakers a lot. To my ears, it's easy to notice the nuance in music. Most people who love the arts and music are not analytical. This often explains the wide diversity in especially expensive speakers.
To my ears, as well as many others who have heard all my systems, they hear a very large positive difference between the Quatro's, the Treos, formerly the Proac Supertowers (my original) as well as when they were rebuilt with new drivers and crossovers.
No need for you to correct anything I posted as I stand fully behind my thoughts. These are things that I and other have heard in my system. Going from the ceramic coated tweeter in the Treo to the carbon fiber is a major step in dynamics, a more realistic presentation and much more detail.
The other thing is that changing just one to a few components or even all of them in a crossover, can give major improvements in a speakers sound and they are positive if implemented correctly. I feel strongly that Richard Vandersteen has done this as he auditions every single change in his speakers. He isn't hand making his carbon fiber cones just for marketing purposes I assure you.
I love hearing folks who love their older gear. I too love a few items I still own, but newer can and often is better to so many that it keeps the industry moving forward.
|
