Magico S5 vs Tannoy Westminster Royal SE

Guys, please take it easy. Although I agree with Melbguy1; Charles1dad passive-aggressive style is irritating, there is no need for any “reporting”.
I stated my views, unfortunately no one seems to bother to take the time to read them. It is easy to take cover under the ignorance shield of “subjectivity”.
Audio reproduction is not as subjective as so many of you think. If you bother to study a bit about it and about the way the gear you spend so much money on tackle the issue, you will become a much better “listener”, and perhaps have some advice worth giving.

A QTC of .5 is called transient perfect for a reason - it reproduces transients (ie with the least amount of ringing) the best of any alignment. It is the most accurate - but most people do not like it - it sounds a bit lean and thin. Higher QTC's are not as accurate - ringing more - but sound more real to most people. There is a brain interpreting this stuff - and that is precisely what you are ignoring.

No, I am not ignoring anything, I am explaining, if you care to listen.

All things being equal, a Q of 0.5 (0.577) will start rolling off sooner than a Q of 0.707 (which will give you flat, most extended frq response). So although you will have better performance in the time domain with 0.5, you will not in the frequency domain. That is the reason, that for a sealed box, people prefer the sound of a Q 0.707 alignment, it simply goes lower play louder and interact with the room better. These are all complex problems, that unfortunately can’t be simplified to the level you are trying to portray here. I am glad you have Dickenson’s book, it is a good start (-;

Audio reproduction is not as subjective as so many of you think. If you bother to study a bit about it and about the way the gear you spend so much money on tackle the issue, you will become a much better “listener”, and perhaps have some advice worth giving.

Bravo!

'All things being equal, a Q of 0.5 (0.577) will start rolling off sooner than a Q of 0.707 (which will give you flat, most extended frq response).'

Although I forgot to mention it, because it was I thought reasonably obvious, the tests were done frequency compensated.

Thanks
Bill

Although I forgot to mention it, because it was I thought reasonably obvious, the tests were done frequency compensated.

Would love to read about these tests, could you please point me (us) to their whereabouts?