actually the major difference is the Jim T objective to be flat at the listening position vs at 1m for Richard V. One can debate the merits of both. Until recently i owned both and while i prefer the Vandy, I can understand the allure of increased treble energy inherent in the JT approach. For those interested , no violin in flat at both 1m and 3 m...... of course if your reference is 32 track studio stuff, keep chasing your tail.... |
Most of Thiel's speakers have demonstrated to me how a single aspect which I think is incorrect can sour the entire speaker and the listening experience. I could never get past the aggressive/forward quality of the treble. To me JT efforts to achieve time/phase alightment did so at tremendous expense. Check out the complexity of many of his crossover designs. |
I am not always the model of all things Buddhist, which is also why I asked the question ending in the question mark. |
@audition__audio , That different time correct loudspeakers have different tonal balances suggest that your complaint might be the result of something other than time correctness. Other than the Thiel CS 5 and 5i, I don’t think the other Thiel models cross-overs are that much more extrodinarily complex than some others. While you are certainly entitled to your opinion and indeed many other’s share it too, the Thiel’s have also been reviewed by others as having something of the opposite impresson. They tend to measure relatively flat.
|
