Am I the only one who thinks B&W is mid-fi?


I know that title sounds pretencious. By all means, everyones taste is different and I can grasp that. However, I find B&W loudspeakers to sound extremely Mid-fi ish, designed with sort of a boom and sizzle quality making it not much better than retail quality brands. At price point there is always something better than it, something musical, where the goals of preserving the naturalness and tonal balance of sound is understood. I am getting tired of people buying for the name, not the sound. I find it is letting the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. In these times of dying 2 channel, and the ability to buy a complete stereo/home theater at your local blockbuster, all of the brands that should make it don't. Most Hi-fi starts with a retail system and with that type of over-processed, boom and sizzle sound (Boom meaning a spike at 80Hz and sizzle meaning a spike at 10,000Hz). That gives these rising enthuists a false impression of what hi-fi is about. Thus, the people who cater to that falseified sound, those who design audio, forgetting the passion involved with listening, putting aside all love for music just to put a nickle in the pig...Well are doing a good job. Honestly, it is just wrong. Thanks for the read...I feel better. Prehaps I just needed to vent, but I doubt it. Music is a passion of mine, and I don't want to have to battle in 20 yrs to get equipment that sounds like music. Any comments?
mikez
Blackie, I can see from my last post how you might think me to be religiously pro-Linn but that's not really the case. I like the integrity of a one brand system both in terms of sound and synergy as well as visual coherance. I don't want boxes of all shapes standing all over the place. I have settled on Linn not because I think that it is the holy grail of hifi, but because I appreciate their solid sensible approach. Their stuff is well designed, simple, elegant, and it meets high standards. Most importantly, (and this is where their loyal following serves them well - particularily in light of all the bad reviews their stubborn approach has garnerered them over the years), they have not caved to homogenized mainstream standards (or lack thereof) of sound reproduction.

But Linn are by no means the only ones whom I would say 'get it'. I'm sure there are many. The few that I have heard I have mentioned in my posts above.

Kalan mentions several speakers above, and at least with respect to the ones I have heard, I agree with him. I must add that the Joseph floorstander, though slightly better in its bass resolution and range, sounds A LOT like the Keilidh. Despite the Joseph's retail being almost twice that of the Keilidh's, I think it is still excellent value and a great speaker. That would make the Keilidh in my opinion, one of the great hifi bargains out there. (since it has been discontinued the Keilidh can be had for roughly 25% of the new price of the Joseph)

As for Keilidh listening coaching classes? You don't need any. Just listen to them for awhile, a few weeks, months, (without too much concentration on the sound because that takes all the enjoyment out of listening to the music) and suddenly you will only be satisfied listening to the likes of Aerial, Audio-Physic, Joseph, Castle, Ruark, Rega,.. or Linn.

The downside is you you may be caught mumbling to yourself, "if ait-taint Scottish, aits Crrap!
Based on Neubilder's comments, it seems I will have to seek out another listen to some Linn systems. A local shop carries Linn--and B&W for that matter. While I am at it, I will try to get a better education about Naim. Both makers seem to have a cult-like appreciation that tends to be lost on the majority of the audio-addicted. Everything is worth another listen.

From my experiences with Rega and Ruark (my fave shop carries them and friends own both brands), I could possibly live with a system comprised of only these manufacturers' gear. (My personal bent currently is for tubes [pre- and power amps] and Coincident Speakers, but I am open to possibilities.)

Maybe I misunderstood something. Neubilder said, "Despite the Joseph's retail being almost twice that of the Keilidh's..." And then later in the same post, "...(since it has been discontinued the Keilidh can be had for roughly 25% of the new price of the Joseph)."

Which is it, 50% or 25% less?

Something else struck me as a odd: If I didn't pay too close attention to the sound of a system (as Neubilder suggests one should do when listening to a Linn system), would not most systems become fairly pleasing? Unless, of course, a system made some horrible mistake.

Again, we are encouraged to listen to a Linn system a certain way--maybe a 'non-audiophile' way (?). We are perhaps asked to focus on the tune, the music, and not sweat the details of the sound. That's legitimate because it should be about the music, right? Yes, but much cheaper gear than Linn will also convey this music-not-hifi message really well. Rega comes to mind.

I will seek out another go with Linn (and Naim). Maybe I'll 'get it.' Neubilder expresses his point of view well. He sounds credible. I will just have to hear it for myself.
Neubilder, I get the 50% and 25% less part, now. I read your statement earlier as '25% off' instead of '25% of.' I should have known better... Please accept my apologies for the aggravation I must have caused.
Kalan, the two Joseph RM22si and the RM25si floorstanders sell for 2500 and 3500 respectively. That is roughly 4x the price of a used pair of Keilidhs, which can be got for between 700 - 900$. Yes, I meant 25% of, not off of, the price of the Joseph's. That's the thing - apart from their flagship models, Linn speakers aren't that expensive.

I agree with you about Rega, they were also at the top of my list.

As for listening to a system, I'm not suggesting that you not let yourself be absorbed by the music. I just think it's important to know when to stop listening to gear and start enjoying music.

I've noticed a lot of audiogoners seem to regard music as little more than a tool to evaluate their gear; "such and such track will reveal the brightness of these cables blah blah..." - they seem to have lost sight of the fact that purpose of all of this is the music!

It seems to me to defeat the purpose if after the latest 'upgrade' one ends up sitting in the designated listening chair squinting in order to hear every subtle sonic difference that it made.

I remember back in the days of cassettes how after a session of making mixed tapes, I would often become tired of the music I just spent hours carefully recording.

I must admit, a lot of these points are things that I have to keep in mind for myself - as an audiophile (I think) we are all faced with the affliction of being fetishists to a certain extent.
From your description of the Linns is sounds like you listen to CDs. If you listen to LP, you may be dissapointed in comparison to other speakers (i was) that have more realistic dimensions to their sound, and a more extended frequency range. I can live without complaint without low bass, but the typical Linn is sad at the top (but not as sad as Ruark). If your reference is restricted to certain unamped events, I am sure the Linns will not reveal thier weakness too much. The inaccurate tonal balance that is their solution to long-term happiness runs in to a brick wall with Rock & orchestra. And Rock which to you has no reference, would be acceptable if the store was to offer a pair for half off. So, I agree with you, $700 is not bad. I am actually thinking about getting a pair for my dear mum, who just moved in to a house. She would like their politeness and ability to keep a good beat. As far as 'midrange clarity', what I think you mean is different from what I heard ( alot). Linns chase down every note and put a big stamp on them. Less colored than some, but more than others.