Verity Parsifal or Magico V3 or Wilson Benesch ACT

Interesting discussion. It seems Stereophile's John Atkinson had issues with a Verity design a few years back. Can't recall the model or year but remember the measurements being the least favorable part of the review.

In my brief experience with the Verity's, under show conditions I have found the Parsifals, Sarasto and Ovations exceptional in stimulating goosebumps which is a quite involuntary reaction. Can this be measured? I'm not sure but maybe someone can take a stab. All I know is that few systems I've listened to could illicit this response. The Verity's I've found are exceptional in recreating timbre and the art of the performance. This is to say they draw you into the music. Of course this may sound trite and maybe cynical to some on the other hand knowledge in the form of measurements and what should sound right based on design principles might also lead to blindness if it is the primary criteria for speaker design.

Careful listening must have a significant role in creating speakers that sound any of the following subjective characteristics; bright, dark, recessed, pleasant, accurate, tonally balanced, real. Which is to say that not every designer is looking for or maybe even hearing the same things in musical reproduction hence all the different choices, aren't we lucky! After all the discussions I've read over the years I'm sure what we hear and value in live music, let alone reproduced, varies from listener to listener so there is no clear cut winner. The losers are the ones that don't survive the marketplace. I am unaware of ONE speaker system in audio that doesn't have at least one detractor including Vandersteen, Verity and Merlin, three of my favorites the latter I own, and isn't it funny they each sound different with their own virtues.

Dhann you make a quite lucid case for why the Verity should sound offensive and I truly appreciate your input to this discussion. If only measurements could predict how a system at a given time in a given room will convey music to a given listener. Art or science, which comes first, that might be the question. After all, which component in an audio system is more a combination of the two?

Tube,

If I recall correctly, JA noted measurement issues with the Sarastro, but later in the review endorsed the sound based on subjective listening tests. My own belief is that the complex, dynamic behavior of a speaker reproducing music in-room has evaded the ability to produce a definitive test. Obviously, the same speaker sounds different in different rooms. It probably also sounds different at different spls in the same room. I suspect that it's gonna be quite a while before we see any test that allows meaningful quantitative testing of loudspeakers.

Marty

PS Notwithstanding the above, you seem to have fine taste in loudspeakers (i.e. the same as me!)

You are raising good points that can help advance the discussion.

Aldavis

I know very well that people buy audio for different reason. But there is a different between a warm speakers that was design properly to be voiced slightly warmer (A controlled elevated lower region), and a speaker, like some Sonus, that is generating way to much energy form its enclosure, and therefore is extremely colored. Some do mistake it for ‘warmth’ and ‘musicality’ when it is basically acting like a musical instrument that is adding lots of uncontrolled and uncalled for energy to everything played into it. Same goes for the ‘impressiveness’ of the Wilson. Elevated midbass, and grungy highs will do the trick. I am saying that you can be accurate and warm (Or cold if the recording is) and impressive yet articulated when you design and build it right. Music is all of the above if you can reproduce it accurately.

Tubegroover,

It is not difficult to get goosebumps from a design without a step correction. The elevated midrange is impressive to the ear on first listen. Especial on a tube amp that has a real easy time with the elevated impedance at that region. But you are listening to a very colored and unnatural representation of the source. I can see why some would like, and I admit that it is fun some times, but not all the time. Not to mention that these kinds of ‘effects’ work on very specific recordings only. So as an avid audiophile, you do end up listening to a very narrow band of music because of that.

To me, listening in room with you electronics, and yes, using your ears is the only that really matters. Yes, the Merlins definitely sound best with tubes, they can work with SS, but they are not the same speaker, they are optimized for the way tubes amps work. And yes, rooms make a lot of difference. The difference between my system with room treatement and without significantly changes the perfomance (better with bass traps and side defraction panels)and in that setup, the Merlins are very coherent and balanced from top to bottom (maybe not the very bottom - but you can't have everything in a speaker - I don't think. It is interesting that Merlin lovers seem to like Verity - there is something they are both doing I right - not sure measurements would tell us why.

Well of course your right Dhaan but SF actually uses the 'transducer as a musical instrument' implicitly in their advertizing. In sense they "voice" the cabinets. The crazy thing is lots of people like this. What can you say? THEY think this is musical and THEY like it. The Wilsons elevated midbass , I think, is intentional and aimed at a consumer who thinks this is normal and indeed expects it. The people at Wilson Audio are not dummies and I have no doubt that for a fraction of what they charge they could produce a better behaved speaker if they so chose. They don't so choose and they are making a hell of alot of money not doing it. Hip hop, boom boxes, the ubiquitous poorly designed sub, even alot of R&B have conspired over time to place an unnatural emphasis on the midbass. If you don't listen to much unamplified music it's hard to unlearn this. Most people don't. - Jim