Magico S5 vs Tannoy Westminster Royal SE

Charles, I respectfully disagree with you. Step into a Subaru, it's just a Subaru. Step into a Porsche and the level of quality, engineering and ultimate performance are just so far ahead it's not funny. And i've driven both. If you look at the level of CAD design, innovation, design talent, obsession with perfection & quality assurance of Magico, i'm sorry but no name brands like Lenehan don't hold up. That's not to say Lenehan aren't good speakers. I mean Subaru is a good car, but in my books there are differences you can both see AND hear with Magico if your accompanying gear and setup are up to scratch. I do agree however with your comment that in the end it's horses for courses. Re: your last comment; in my books a slap in face earns a condescending insult. All the best.

People have test driven(heard) the Magico and were not impressed.They don't impress me, but so what, just my opinion. I totally get the point that you and usermanual find the Magico to be your Porsche standard, others simply do not. It doesn't matter, the Magico S5 suits your needs and desires so other's opinions have no bearing on your satisfaction. I say congratulations to you for finding a sucessful speaker for your system. I hope you enjoy them for a very long time. I feel the same toward those who've gone in another direction as well. Tannoy for instance. In truth, just be happy with your choices and ignore the criticism of others.
Charles,

Charles, your comment above is likely true I suspect, though I usually find those who dislike the Magico S5's tend to like euphoric sounding gear, and a degree of coloration. They also tent to be those who either a/ can't afford the level of system required to do justice to the S5's, or b/ seem clueless about the importance of carefully matching upstream gear for best synergy. Btw, Myles B Astor was impressed with the S5's & recently posted this video review - http://www.avshowrooms.com/Magico_S5_Speaker.html

Correction: I meant to say "euphonic" not euphoric sounding gear above, but no edit posts option in this thread.

'You can like what you (think) you like, but it has already been proven that in a control environment, tested blind, most people prefer a better engineered loudspeaker'

Untrue.

It has been proven, for example, in controlled studies, and this is well known to speaker designers, that more accurate speaker alignments are NOT preferred. A QTC of .5 is the most accurate, being called transient perfect. But most people find it lean and anaemic - its the most accurate - but most designers - yes even your beloved Magico - shy away from it using an alignment of .6 or .65 because people like it better.

But even aside from that accuracy involves many parameters. Which is the most important? For example, early transistor amps had extremely low distortion - so low it was hard to even measure. This was achieved by HUGE amounts of global feedback - yet they sounded like the life was sucked out of the music. Why? I don't think anyone conclusively found out but it was recognised that there is a lag between when distortion occurred and feedback corrected it and that was likely an issue. So transient response became important to reduce that lag. So what is it that determines how an amp will sound - distortion measurements or transient response? BTW most amp designers now use feedback very judiciously and concentrate on its application locally.

The interaction between measurement and what people prefer is a very complex one not accounted for by simplistic platitudes such as accuracy is better.

One must ALWAYS listen to gear - that is the only measure.

But even aside from that exactly what your beef is has me beat. All myself and others are saying is listen to both and make your own mind up. If Magico is so obviously superior then the outcome is not in doubt.

Thanks
Bill