Verity Parsifal or Magico V3 or Wilson Benesch ACT

Dhaan, I agree that if you make claims for your technology you need to defend the rationale for the performance improvement. When I say I don't care about theory, but prefer to listen, it's because theories are indeed many times more based on marketing differentiation then anything else. I always trust my ears, and how the designer gets it done is there business. Helps from getting caught up in flavor of the month pursuits, every time a new techonology is tauted - I'm not saying there isn't some advantage to the use of carbon fibre, there might very well be. The WBs to sound good to my ears, as did the Vandersteen 5A that Audioconnection mentioned.

Pubul57

I think that people in general trust their ears too much. I mean do you really prefer/like the sound of a recessed midrange? And if so, why? This is not a condescending question. I think that you should be interested in the reasons you like the sound of a faulty design (Parsifals). Otherwise, it is all a crap shoot. God only know what goes in someone head when he listens to stereo. 90% of it probably have nothing to do with sound. Are you in a good mood? What have you had for lunch, are you trying to feel the “Stealth bomber” effect, etc. Why do you think that blind testing usually does not work? How many times have you convinced yourself that what you have just bought, that sounds like crap, actually sounds great (only to change it few days later)? I too have my preferences but I like to be more careful in my conclusions. It is very easy to make wrong assumption by ‘trusting’ your ears only.

the goal may be to reach peace of mind on the long haul.
we see indeed many great speakers and gear in general for sale again within a relative short time.
you can see certain brands of gear at the second hand markets very soon, and in large quantity too.
there are brands who build and emphasis greatly on 'stealth bomber' and 'space shuttle' or (great one too) the US nuclear submarine technology. others dweep with 'as found in time of the cold war' i'm sure the imagination has no holds to marketing.
if YG can claim it has the "best speaker on earth period" for sure another could claim theirs is now "best in universe" or best in whole galaxy.
who are we as audiophiles that this marketing apparently works and sells? it must surely work to sell more speakers, otherwise this company would noy invest such enormous amounts on advertising.

i further believe reading reviews of actual owners that the YG speakers are very fine indeed! for me no need to 'proof' this in almost agressive advertisement.

back to topic, i do not only trust my ears when listening to great music, my heart sings too.
that is what Verity audio is about. whatever technology.
Verity has a large community of mostly dedicated long haulers.
some sell their Verity because they *think* they found *better* speakers else, only to buy a pair of Verity again within time.
that feeling of coming home is not unknow to me :-)
btw i worked some 10 years in aerospace industry, with all the exotic materials to be found. carbon fibre is great stuff, do not inhale particals, never sand dry. particals cause lung cancer absolutely.

R32nj: where are you on your choice up to now ?
keep em spinning.

Dhaan, I used to be purely in the objectivist camp like you. I could never understand Wilsons appeal based on their measurments. Somewhere along the way I discovered that there are lots of things to like about listening to music that can not be measured and that what I look for in a speaker is not applicable to others. Let them have their fun. If someone gets joy from listening to a 'flawed' design then who are we to suggest that he shouldn't be joyful. Of course the stealth bomber stuff is marketing B.S. So is " revolutionary" in reference to a box speaker with dynamic drivers. As a disclaimer I own W.B. Chimera speakers and love their sound. My feelings are not hurt that you don't like their design or their sound ( if in fact you have heard them). I cant comment on a Japanese mags measurments of the ACTs. Whatever the ACT's measured harmonics the Chimeras sound extremly accurate to me. I am not a musician but my wife is and I have spent alot of time listening to live music including in the studio. I listen to music every single day. Yes, I too could be "foolish" or " over my head" or whatever else you want to call me. The tenor of this debate with you and audiofeil making personal attacks and impuning the motives of others because they disagree with you is unfortunate. Didn't we get into this because we love music ? - Jim

Dhaan,
Please, read my answer again. What I wrote before is that the WB's ACT cabinet uses a sandwich of composite materials w/ a high density foam core.
The ACT's cabinet is made of an internal layer of fiberglass, a high density foam (Last-a-foam) core material and an external layer of carbon fiber. What sounds-real-audio is trying to explain you, is that the carbon fiber will add rigidity to the enclosure while the high density foam will absorb unwanted resonances very fast. That is why you cannot use a thin metal sheet to replace the carbon fiber as you asked. The ACT cabinet is not just made of a thin rigid layer of carbon fiber, which would not absorb the sound, but layers of different materials. The overall cabinet thickness is around 13mm.

In my opinion, for such a small footprint the ACT's have, the unwanted resonances are very well controlled.

Thank you.