Tang Band 2145 in action

So- what’s the bottom line? This standard, basic version gives a real taste of vey high end sound at a true bargain price.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually  did not read the Thor review, just a  snipet.

So a  taste of VERY high end.
Yeah thats accurate.

Not sure if you are aware the Millennium tweet is well known as a very accurate tweeter.
I sold the new pair off in 2 hours on Ebay at 60% off. 
2 HOURS!!!!
But at 87db , not workable for my preferences with  a   tiny 3/4 inch VC, vs the WBers  gorgeous whizzer, which radiates  wider expanse of  highs. 
I just like the fact all 3  fq's 's are sourced at one point.
 Also
 For a  really nice sound exp for my classical muisc which requires sensitivity to pick up low flute notes, and tiny hits of percussions.
Bottom line, i get everything the Millennium offered, but at a higher sensitivity.

I don't think that the posted videos show problems with the speaker; I don't think it shows any merit to them either.  It is simply the case that you cannot discern anything about the sound of speakers from a video.  If someone is listening to the video on the very kind of speakers that are purportedly defective, how can the sound have been miraculously transformed by first being played on the WB speakers used in the video such that it now sounds good on ANY speaker?  Not one bit of evidence on sound quality can come from a video.  A description of the sound, particularly a comparison to the sound of specific speakers, is at least "evidence" of sorts.

I gather from your video that you put the Tang Band driver in an already made box that was not specifically designed for this speaker.  While it is possible to get "lucky" (I've heard many examples of good sound from just such an experiment), you cannot know if your setup is ideal--there could be more performance to be had in a different cabinet, with different volume, port dimensions, cabinet resonant behavior, damping, etc.  It does not help others trying to experiment for themselves if they don't know specifics such as the Thiele Small parameters of the driver, the cabinet design, specific crossover details, etc.  It would be a miracle if this  one-shot experiment hit upon the perfection that should put the rest of the world of speaker manufacturers out of business.

Allow me to complete the quote for you. He basically states that after mods to the crossover, they could give competition to speakers in the 8-10k range. Not "they would", but "they could". And it doesn't say beat, it says compete. Throw the colorations he mentioned in there and it is not a ringing endorsement for the Thors IMO. It is basically a statement of you should give them consideration. See the full quote right here.

So- what's the bottom line? This standard, basic version gives a real taste of vey high end sound at a true bargain price.
If the "improved" DIY crossovers work as reported, these could give real competion to commercial speakers in the $8-10k class.

Now you admit that......

I cautally can hear things in the YT vid of the TB2145, that is now clear why I stayed with the davidLouis VX8.

Would that be because someone pointed these things out to you?

Not sure if you are aware the Millennium tweet is well known as a very accurate tweeter.

The Tyler speakers that I mentioned that I owned (Super Tower) have the Millenium tweeter in them, so yes, I am well aware of them and what they sound like.

Look if the Focals, KEF's, Vandersteens, Wislon;'s were as special as you suggest,

I have never owned any of them and have never suggested that they were special. Unlike you, I have actually been in the same room with and heard models from all of them at one time or another. Like all speakers, they have their pluses and minuses. I have heard multiple wide band speakers in person as well. None of them have been good enough to my ears to even consider replacing my fully active speakers. Not even close. 

I am very much a fan of wide-band drivers, particularly in systems employing them in multi-way systems where the wideband driver covers a very substantial part of the frequency range.

But, even among fans of this type of speaker, there is no consensus on what is better, much less best, and personal taste can dictate widely varying approaches to utilizing such drivers.  At a local dealership that builds custom speakers, I heard a system utilizing a GIP 4165 driver (12" field coil full range driver).  The experiment was between using that driver full range without any other driver, or using a tweeter at a very high nominal crossover point (first order high-pass filter to the tweeter, the 4165 driven full range).  I preferred the two-way configuration, but, not because it delivered more highs or better dispersion, but, because I thought the upper midrange sounded smoother and less peaky.  Most of the other listeners agreed with me, but, not everyone preferred the two-way version; the designer/builder preferred the single driver version.

Would that be because someone pointed these things out to you?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No 
due to the DavidLouis has construuct that is cool and neat looking.
Almost a  clone of a   german labs speaker.
Mids were a  tad better in the DLVX8 vs the Tang Band.  Bass near identical. 
Why so, since both cones are completely dif materails,,I have no idea.

Blind test, you'd be lucky to guess which is which, at least on some/most records.

Glad you like your conventional LOUD speakers.
And that you found the WB's lacking. 
Whereas I found them near perfect, if not perfect  for my classical music. 

Here is a  bass test,  4 pieces for Timipini,  Elliott Carter.
I give it  10/10

WB;'s are only 1 speaker option in the wide world of speaker designs.

Here you get a  hint at the bass response.
YMMV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QtuLPchkt0