6moons review of FAB Audio Model 1 speaker

For the price, I expect more than what these 2-ways provide. They're practically monitors.

I thought the reviewer tried his absolute best, using different rooms and gear. At the end, he found he didn't favor them. What is he supposed to say? Isn't one of the biggest complaints audioheads have about reviews is there aren't any bad ones, making us wonder what the purpose is in the first place?

Every piece of gear isn't a shining jewel and competitive way above its price-point. I'm glad to read someone calling it like they hear it.

And, like the other comments, if you've gotten these speakers to harmonize, that's all that matters.

I'd say the review seems reasonable overall, and I WOULD call it a Negative. (It's actually very refreshing to see a negative review in the audio press.)

First off, if you like the sound of the FAB's, keep 'em. Everyone's ears are different - literally. This is something which is given very little attention. While listening, just hold your hands behind your ears, or move them around a bit - the frequency response and timbre of the music changes dramatically. And your ear canal is different than others, even more so. So the tonal balance of the FABs may be the eq that works for you naturally, and not for the reviewer.

I personally find some of the newer designs' tonal characteristics unlistenable, which many people (including 6Moons) rave about, i.e. Gallo Ref III's. Are they wrong? I dunno - all I know is what I like. And I couldn't care less what the self-proclaimed "experts" say.

As to the specifics, however:

- I didn't get a feeling that the reviewer had any personal beef with Fabian. But he did have some healthy skepticism - "I asked Jim in an email some basic questions about the crossover (type, slope, frequency compensation) but he stated that he is unwilling to reveal more specific information about the design due to -- unsuccessful so far -- efforts by a competitor to clone FAB designs." Gimme a break! This stuff could easily be measured and/or reverse engineered by a competitor willing to buy a pair. Is the FAB brand such a hot seller that a knockoff is going to make someone's business?

Overall, I think Marsh tried to be supportive where possible while stating firmly that he had some serious issues.

Now here I'll say a few things that the reviewer may have pulled some punches on:
On a technical note, I suspect that theoretically there is some reason for what Marsh hears. Matching a 10" paper cone to a metal (or any, really) tweeter, as an 80-2000 hz. mid-bass driver in a 3-way design is a very unusual choice - and to me, anyway, seems rather odd. Since there's already a 10" woofer in the rear, why not use a nice tight 8" (or even 6") for the important mids? The FAB borders on a Talon-like design, which is very difficult to pull off succesfully even using high-tech, specialized drivers.
And frankly, it appears to me that the rear-firing woofer is loaded into the same cabinet space as the 10" mid-bass? This makes no sense to me. Whatever's going on inside that cabinet, and the interaction of the two drivers' on each other would be a mess.

Frankly, to me, this speaker appears to be designed for an aesthetic "look" more than as an assault on new audio-highs.

The choice of the RS speaker wire and NAD cd doesn't bother me (too much) if this is a setup that the reviewer knows well and is happy with. I don't subscribe to the "megabucks is megabetter" hype, myself - ESPECIALLY when it comes to copper wire. Different CD players have different attributes, and I've heard cheap ones that I loved and ridiculously expensive ones that I hated. Most high end players are just assembled from stock parts, packaged into a pretty box. There are very few companies actually building transports and A/D converters. However, if I was a reviewer I would use more upscale equipment just to avoid having to protect myself from the Hype Police.

One fault I do find with the review, and 6Moons in general, is the dearth of objective measurement. Yeah, oscilloscopes don't define the "sound" of a component, but especially in the case of a negative review like th FABs it would provide some verification as to what the reviewer is actually hearing and where it might be coming from. A basic spectral analysis is not difficult or expensive to perform nowadays.

Overall, I think the review is probably indicative of a "problem" with the FABs as most people will hear them, and I give credit to Marsh and 6Moons for running it. But again, that doesn't mean there's something "wrong" with a listener who likes them. It could be just the right match for them.

for those who say enjoy what you have and who cares what a reviewer says are definately right. But on the other hand, one might also consider that a person who buys a high dollar product, might hope for a decent return when he resells it. If that product gets semi trashed in print the resale value could go down pretty quickly or get to the point where nobody wants it at all. That could be a bit disturbing.

Thanks everyone for your viewpoints, all very interesting.
Shiva - you raise a very valid point about how a bad review could sink resale value - good thing I'm planning on keeping my Model 1s.
Opalchip - you raise too many good points to single out individually.
Miklorsmith - yes, it is refreshing to see that a negative review can and will be published which helps preserve our "trust" in the reviewers.

I don't mean to sound like a poor sport because frankly the review doesn't impact me at all and I have no vested interest in FAB AUDIO aside from being a customer. And as some of you have said, as long as the speakers work for me then who cares . . .!? While it does come across that the reviewer did everything he could to fix the problem - so cudos to him for spending the energy & time with what he had at his disposal - it just doesn't seem fair to use gear that is in a very different league than the speakers are to judge the speakers and then perscibe the sound problem as being speaker related. Taking an extreme example to make my point, would you use an Apple iPod as a sound source to judge very expensive speakers like the Wilson Audio Grand Slam or MAXX speakers? Of course not; most people's systems have components which are all fairly close to being at the same quality level (however you define quality). So if Jim from FAB Audio had brought along an amp and cables and CDP etc. and if the reviewer let him insert it then the outcome might have been very different. Chances are though that the reviewer wouldn't be familiar with Jim's equipment so most likely would have rejected the notion of using it.

Lets do the audio industry justice by providing a fair review to its readers by using upstream components/cables that are of the same quality of the component being evaluated.

Anyone who has read a few of my posts knows my opinion about the Fab Model 1. I think Marsh came up short in the "serious reviewer" sweepstakes with this one. Unlike others in this thread I sm convinced that upstream components make a big difference to the final outcome, especially when placed behind ultra-transparent speakers like these. Here's a portion of a letter I sent to 6moons on the subject:

On my previous speakers (also 97dB sensitive dynamic speakers from another manufacturer) my favourite speaker cables were TG Audio HSR. These sounded warm and full, with quite good transparency. In contrast, a pair of Argent Audio Pursang S which I also own were very transparent and detailed, but a touch lean and tipped-up sounding. Two silver cables but with somewhat different sounds.

On the Fab Audio Model 1 - in the same room, with the same Audion PX25 amp and Audio Note Level 4 digital front end - the pleasing warmth and body of the HSR morphed into an excessively warm, bloomy thickness, with a distinctly noticeable lack of transparency in the bass. In contrast, the Pursang S was revealed as quite forward sounding, with absolutely incredible detail, speed and imaging but a noticeable thinness and more than a bit of bite. While its bass was very transparent, it was obviously light.

So what have we here? Two speaker cables that both performed quite well on a lower resolution speaker, whose divergent personalities were revealed with unmistakable clarity by the Model 1. It was as though each cable had finally been allowed to express its inherent qualities to the maximum. This says to me that any fault in the Model 1 lies in its ability to make utterly explicit the effects of upstream components.

When I read Mr. Marsh's review in light of my own experience, my attention was immediately drawn to the descriptions of his speaker cables and vintage electronics. I don't know if these were the source of any of his dissatisfaction as I'm not familiar with any of them, but there is always the possibility that they were suboptimal partners to the Model 1. A follow-up review using a different room and system might be appropriate.

By the way, I subsequently purchased a pair of Kimber KS-3038 speaker cables, and the sound from the Model 1's driven through those is nothing short of stupendous. While the Model 1 require some care and feeding, like any top thoroughbred if they are fed properly they just might win the Derby.

Poor equipment synergy and room interactions are the only things I can point to to explain whey the sound that Steve Marsh heard diverged so radically from what I get in my (dedicated, symmetrical, well-treated) room. It's a shame, because this review has already discouraged at least one person I'm aware of from actually listening to Fab speakers for themselves (a decision I shall let pass without further comment).

I'll add one more thing about this tempest in a teaspoon - most of the responsibility for any insalubrious outcome rests on the manufacturer's shoulders. He was called in by the reviewer to help sort out the problems, and if the situation wasn't to his satisfaction it was his prerogative to withdraw from the review. He didn't, so presumably he felt things were good enough to proceed. Perhaps there's a lesson in there...

As others have said, if I'm happy with my speakers why should I complain? I'm not complaining that hard (especially nor for myself), but I firmly believe that reviewers have a responsibility to get at some amount of objective truth. Based on what I read and what I've heard, I'm not convinced that this review got close enough.