Cube Audio or Charney

I spent 3 hours in July listening to Charneys speakers and they do sound nice but ultimately not for my taste.  Also the one I really liked for my room was very expensive esp given the build quality so I couldn't justify it or resale value if i got tired,, but that point is taste as well. 

I am told the Charneys are warmer than the cube audio Speakers the same guy says the Cube is more transparent and open. 

bobheinatz OP622 posts12-13-2019 12:58pmBache, can we agree that all speakers are a compromise?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes but the sacrifices we all have to make with xover designs.
Been there done that.
I had the worlds finest(well one of the worlds top tweets) tweeter in my Seas Thors.
For jazz its a great tweeter, For full symphony orchestra the Seas had serious issues. .
Just about any speaker will work just fine with a jazz quartet, trio.
But when it comes to classical chamber/full orchestra, something more than your average box speaker will be needed.
xovers do not work well with full symphony orchestra.
Xovers havea tendency to filter out the pure musical source.
The biggest benifit of wide band is the xover is eliminated thus allowing more of the processed signal from source/line stage/amp to pass through more freely and a huge bonus is the higher sensitivty.
Win-Win-Win
I see too many sacrifices in xover designs.
Not my cup of tea.
Pity I never researched wide band years ago.
Most folks /newbies have no idea what a wide band is all about.
Its something like from another planet. They are confused as to how they work, and what are the advantages over xover designs.
So , no, I am not buying into the **all speaker designs are a compromise* any longer.
That mantra needs to be put to rest. 

You ask me, : 
Do you know how a  wide band/xoverless works?
No I  do not know. I failed science and math.
Its not important, as many of us here really do not understand how xovers work either. Except I know I do not like xovers in acoustics. 
Sensitivty is too low.  
Looks like september,,,wait  a  minute, she just NOW said **Get them whenever you want** as we know there are hooks in something like that. 
I better wait another month, test the waters.
So looks like I;'lll have the wide band a  month earlier than planed.
I'm thinking Aug1st I;'ll order when my $900 ss ck comes. Already have 900 in cash/paypal. 
Its like 2100 ship included

I really like the Charney speakers, and I also like the Nenuphar speaker too.  I don't think I can attribute what I like to the lack of a crossover, but, that certainly is a possible reason why they both sound so good.  I think I could live with the Charney, particularly with one of the better AER drivers in it.  

But, I own a three way system that, on balance, I like even more than either of the speakers mentioned above.  Yes, it costs far more than either speaker (the midrange horn/compression drivers alone cost more than either systems), and it is certainly not better in all respects and I can easily understand why someone would prefer either of the two models under discussion.  My system is 99 db/w efficient, so it has not suffered too much from loss of efficiency from having a crossover.  A friend has a three way horn system that is 107 db/w efficient.  A crossover does soak up some power, particularly if it is complex and it is used to correct phase/timing and to correct frequency response anomalies, but, utilizing drivers optimized for performing over a limited frequency range has its pluses.