Magico S5 vs Tannoy Westminster Royal SE

Mel,
In a previous post I congratulated you on your ownership of the Magico S5 speaker and wished you many years of enjoying them, I meant every word I wrote. I can easily accept and acknowledge that taste and preferences vary amongst all of us. It's a fact the I find quite understandable, subjective decisions entail numerous factors.

Every brand of an audio component will have admirers (some devout) and detractors, no exceptions, so this includes Magico. This is just how things are, people choose what appeals to them and reject what does not suit their needs. Why is this hard to conceive? This reaction from you and Usermanual is frankly puzzling. If you feel obligated to report me due to an open forum discussion on speakers, do as you must. You coming up with this idea speaks volumes.For the last time, guys, we're only discussing a hobby topic. The emotional response from both of you is confounding.
Take Care,
Charles,

'QTC is not a scale for determining how good a speaker is, it is simply an indicator of how the speaker behaves at its resonant frequency.'

Dear oh dear. Your knowledge of speaker design needs work I am afraid.

A QTC of .5 is called transient perfect for a reason - it reproduces transients (ie with the least amount of ringing) the best of any alignment. It is the most accurate - but most people do not like it - it sounds a bit lean and thin. Higher QTC's are not as accurate - ringing more - but sound more real to most people. There is a brain interpreting this stuff - and that is precisely what you are ignoring.

I know it blows a hole in your view of Hi Fi - but its a fact Jack.

I suggest you get a copy of Vance Dickensons the Loudspeaker Cookbook:
http://www.amazon.com/Loudspeaker-Design-Cookbook-Vance-Dickason/dp/1882580478

Thanks
Bill

as i was killing a few minutes this a.m. i stumbled across this thread. my god this is priceless on so many levels. it is nearly shakespearean or at least woody allenesque. some of you guys kill me! should i ever develop such deep affection for stereo equipment please pull the plug. fwiw i go for the single full range driver approach but i would swap for a fishing trip in northern ontario.

Guys, please take it easy. Although I agree with Melbguy1; Charles1dad passive-aggressive style is irritating, there is no need for any “reporting”.
I stated my views, unfortunately no one seems to bother to take the time to read them. It is easy to take cover under the ignorance shield of “subjectivity”.
Audio reproduction is not as subjective as so many of you think. If you bother to study a bit about it and about the way the gear you spend so much money on tackle the issue, you will become a much better “listener”, and perhaps have some advice worth giving.

A QTC of .5 is called transient perfect for a reason - it reproduces transients (ie with the least amount of ringing) the best of any alignment. It is the most accurate - but most people do not like it - it sounds a bit lean and thin. Higher QTC's are not as accurate - ringing more - but sound more real to most people. There is a brain interpreting this stuff - and that is precisely what you are ignoring.

No, I am not ignoring anything, I am explaining, if you care to listen.

All things being equal, a Q of 0.5 (0.577) will start rolling off sooner than a Q of 0.707 (which will give you flat, most extended frq response). So although you will have better performance in the time domain with 0.5, you will not in the frequency domain. That is the reason, that for a sealed box, people prefer the sound of a Q 0.707 alignment, it simply goes lower play louder and interact with the room better. These are all complex problems, that unfortunately can’t be simplified to the level you are trying to portray here. I am glad you have Dickenson’s book, it is a good start (-;