Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass - as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at £1200, or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

I "reckon" this post does not belong on rec.audio.markeplace

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass - as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at £1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

You will find that the strength of the illusion is a combination of the
speakers and the room.
There is no universal solution.
Some people are more influenced by imaging; others by tonality. The relative
importance of these to the listener influences the judgement.


Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass - as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'

This is true. High-Q woofers have better timbre, but at the expense of bass
extension.

people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at £1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

Many people believe that above $1500, there is not a close correlation
between performance and price.
Larger systems with many drivers frequently do not image well, especially in
rooms of average size.
Some expensive systems have deliberately colored sound, because they aim for
a segment of the market who have highly subjective preferences.

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass
-- as the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural
roll-off --
resulting in more 'bass blur'

This is true. High-Q woofers have better timbre, but at the expense of bass
extension.

Both the question and the answer show a nearly complete misunderstanding of
woofer design. I wish I had the time...

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but
there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass
-- as the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural
roll-off --
resulting in more 'bass blur'

This is true. High-Q woofers have better timbre, but at the expense of
bass
extension.

Both the question and the answer show a nearly complete misunderstanding
of
woofer design. I wish I had the time...

Sorry, I was dyslexic.

LOW Q woofers have better timbre.

High-Q woofers are more dominated by resonant behavior.

There will be no acceptable answer to your question as the clues that allow
people to build such an image are learnt and as such you will get a lot of
different opinions.

My personal favourites are Avantgarde Unos/Duo and are in the $10000 + price
range. They claim their special subs give a fast uncoloured bass to match
the horn loaded mid and treble. Of course if you have a huge room you could
always hear the Trios with full horn loaded bass but at $40000 plus they are
out of my price range and far too big for my room !!
http://www.avantgarde-usa.com/ads_2.html
Others will point out that panel speakers such as Quads, Magnaplanars,
Apogees etc give the best images
Regards Richard


"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass - as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at £1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

Sorry, I was dyslexic.
Low-Q woofers have better timbre.
High-Q woofers are more dominated by resonant behavior.

Thanks for correcting that slip. I was really worried there...!

thanks - i understand imaging, but what do you mean 'tonailty'


"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any
mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

You will find that the strength of the illusion is a combination of the
speakers and the room.
There is no universal solution.
Some people are more influenced by imaging; others by tonality. The
relative
importance of these to the listener influences the judgement.


Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but
there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass -
as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'

This is true. High-Q woofers have better timbre, but at the expense of
bass
extension.

people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at
£1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up
with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

Many people believe that above $1500, there is not a close correlation
between performance and price.
Larger systems with many drivers frequently do not image well, especially
in
rooms of average size.
Some expensive systems have deliberately colored sound, because they aim
for
a segment of the market who have highly subjective preferences.

why?

"John Richards" wrote in message
...
I "reckon" this post does not belong on rec.audio.markeplace

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any
mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but
there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass -
as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at
£1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up
with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
why?

Because it's a "marketplace".

"John Richards" wrote in message
...
I "reckon" this post does not belong on rec.audio.markeplace

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any
mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but
there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated
bass -
as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural
roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does
that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at
£1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up
with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

"John Richards" wrote in message
...

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
why?

Because it's a "marketplace".

of ideas.

"Sparky" wrote in message ...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass - as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at £1200, or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

I hate to be cynical, but I think this post is a troll solely intended
to draw attention to the website URL that he posted. If you go to the
site and read the FAQ (the only place with any real text) you will
find a similar writing style to this post.

The site is selling speakers that appear to be a dressed up 3-way 6x9
car audio speaker (the giveaway is the 4 ohm impedance and 40W RMS
power handling, which are typical for these types of car speakers)
mounted in a transmission line enclosure. The explanations given show
no understanding of loudspeaker design and give a lot of blather
trying to explain why their speakers having no bass is actually a good
thing.

"Sparky" wrote in message ...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated bass - as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does that mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at £1200, or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

I hate to be cynical, but I think this post is a troll solely intended
to draw attention to the website URL that he posted. If you go to the
site and read the FAQ (the only place with any real text) you will
find a similar writing style to this post.

The site is selling speakers that appear to be a dressed up 3-way 6x9
car audio speaker (the giveaway is the 4 ohm impedance and 40W RMS
power handling, which are typical for these types of car speakers)
mounted in a transmission line enclosure. The explanations given show
no understanding of loudspeaker design and give a lot of blather
trying to explain why their speakers having no bass is actually a good
thing.

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
thanks - i understand imaging, but what do you mean 'tonailty'


The frequency response of most speakers is influenced by subjective
considerations.
For example, some speakers sold into Asian markets are specially tailored
for music of the sitar.
Other speakers that have a bright high end may be attractive to lovers of
percussion.
Some speakers have exaggerated bass; others have limited bass that
reproduced orchestral drum timbres with great accuracy.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"John Richards" wrote in message
...

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
why?

Because it's a "marketplace".

of ideas.

I stand corrected. I will butt out now.

so I am asking the 'marketplace' what it wants
i am offering a product for sale - a new fllorstander design
www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk , but it seems the 'marketplace' has a
'taste' for distorted bass, and i need to find out how open minded people
are to the notion that bass can be clearer but low level in a really good
loudspeaker than ever.
no one can sell a product well unless they understand the bias of the buyer.

what better way than to ask here?

"John Richards" wrote in message
...

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
why?

Because it's a "marketplace".

"John Richards" wrote in message
...
I "reckon" this post does not belong on rec.audio.markeplace

"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Hi, what do reckon are the worlds best loudspeakers.
in terms of believing the the performers are in the room without any
mics
involved i.e.
acoustic guitar/singing/stringed inst

Also what do you think about bass? I think attack is important, but
there
seems to be no floorstander out there which has an unadulterated
bass -
as
the crossovers always try to flatten out the woofer's natural
roll-off -
resulting in more 'bass blur'
people say the worlds best must come at a 5 figure price, but does
that
mean
the RESOLUTION (www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk) is too cheap at
£1200,
or
is it a fact that only big investment and R&D depts can ever come up
with
the best because it has to complicated not simple

No one (at least, not me) is arguing that transmission line bass is generally
superior. The problem is the preposterous claim that this speaker is
categorically superior to anything else out there.

I might also add that the Website is poorly written and edited. It's lame and
amateurish, certainly not the sort of presentation that would encourage a
prospective buyer to stop by for a demo.

Sparky wrote...
so I am asking the 'marketplace' what it wants
i am offering a product for sale - a new fllorstander design
www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk , but it seems the 'marketplace' has a
'taste' for distorted bass, and i need to find out how open minded people
are to the notion that bass can be clearer but low level in a really good
loudspeaker than ever.
no one can sell a product well unless they understand the bias of the buyer.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message


No one (at least, not me) is arguing that transmission line bass is
generally superior. The problem is the preposterous claim that this
speaker is categorically superior to anything else out there.

It's obviously a 3-way driver intended for the automotive aftermarket in an
enclosure made up of an undisclosed material.

Example of a questionable claim:

"twice as efficient/loud as most other high-end loudspeakers - enabling
lower amplifier power i.e. ideal for a valve or class-A amplifier".

But, we know that efficiency, size and bass extension must be traded off.
Since efficiency is said to be high for its size, it must not have
competitive amounts of bass extension.

I imagine that with a little searching one could figure out WHICH automotive
driver it is make up out of.

I might also add that the Website is poorly written and edited.

Agreed.


It's lame and amateurish, certainly not the sort of presentation that
would encourage a prospective buyer to stop by for a demo.

For example the background and foreground pictures at

http://www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk

don't agree with each other.

thank you for your generally constuctive criticism, which i wish to reply
to..

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message


No one (at least, not me) is arguing that transmission line bass is
generally superior.

actually you and me seem in aminority

The problem is the preposterous claim that this
speaker is categorically superior to anything else out there.

it is obvious and undeniable that it uses a single drive unit, and a more
efficient TL that have EVER been seen before. even on paper - this has to be
the best imaging, soundstage and realistic loudspeaker for HF/MF with clear
but light bass. I dont think it is therefore 'preposterous' to claim "the
worlds best loudspeaker under 12 inches wide", or "worlds best loudspeaker
in terms or realism" (assuming you dont think that the most important part
of any living room destined loudspeaker is the bass loudness)

would you expect the ESL57s to be superior, they arent, the Celection SL6s -
completely on a lower category, etc etc, real listening tests under
controlled comparitive conditions - not some 'designed for' listening room
at a dealers with one or two similar models demo'd.

The only reason I decided to chuck in a well paid consulting occupation, and
spend everything and all my time on making and marketing this loudspeaker is
because it SOUNDED so MUCH more realistic and clear than anything I ever
heard except possibly headphones. since then, I have patented, developed the
finish, sold pairs, and got them accepted by fussy dealers as the clearest
thing in the shop, and also gone about buying/borrowing world standard
equipment to perform controlled listening and measurement testing on better
known standards.

FYI yesterday I completed an inital investigation by measurement to conclude
that there was no measurable tone distortion from CD data to loudspeaker
input, so therefore my suspicions were proven that the equalisation done
during production was responsible for most recordings sounding clear and
bright on the Resolutions, and not inferior engineering. Since the
resolutions FR is relatively flat between 5k-18khz, it must be that other
manuf have used inferior tweeters or attenuated them for the market's
taste - this is apparent from retailer feedback. Conversely what the
resolutions do - for the first time I believe, is give you an accurate
performance of tone and realism that is on the recording - not what you
neccesarily find most comfortable.
bit like WYSIWYG - WYRIWYG (recorded).

the resolution doesnt seem to suit the mainstream bland taste(re high street
hifi dealers) - it is for the conoisseur, audiophile - those who would spoil
the pleasure of easy listening, just to experience fantastic realistic
reproduction on more selective recordings, and study in detail what was
performed/recorded, not just 'listen to music'.





It's obviously a 3-way driver intended for the automotive aftermarket in
an
enclosure made up of an undisclosed material.


Example of a questionable claim:

"twice as efficient/loud as most other high-end loudspeakers - enabling
lower amplifier power i.e. ideal for a valve or class-A amplifier".

But, we know that efficiency, size and bass extension must be traded off.
Since efficiency is said to be high for its size, it must not have
competitive amounts of bass extension.

That was my opinion from listening tests, and i agree it needs
substantiating on the website better. What I am doing in the nex 2 days, is
publishing full photos/charts/measurements of efficiency in a typical lounge
for the full range of frequencies - not just the most efficient band. I
think this is the first time it has been published. I will publish the
procedure for measuring power, and the wav files to use, so anyone can
compare/verify results at home using SPL meter, scope and a resistor. I do
agree otherwise efficiency data is meaningless, as published by driver
manuf, loudspeaker manuf. etc. the question is - if it is twice as eff in
MF, how much less eff is it at 100hz? the answer is partly published as the
FR charts on the website, but as we all know - a weaker amp say valve,
connected to a celestion SL6 with big crossover to boost bass will not be
able to deliver substantial bass because although the FR says it can, it is
much less efficient at LF repoduction - thus requiring a bigger amp - say
the Pioneer A400/Yamaha A420. Having run the resolutions on Leak and Rogers
valve amps rated at about 5W/ch, I can say without tone control adjustment
the results were audibly and measurably twice as loud as any other
loudspeaker tested.
Thank you for questioning my claim - but as I pointed out now - the answer
was already largely copied from the website which you copied out of context
here. www.worldsbestloudspeakers.com



I imagine that with a little searching one could figure out WHICH
automotive
driver it is make up out of.

I might also add that the Website is poorly written and edited.

Agreed.


It's lame and amateurish, certainly not the sort of presentation that
would encourage a prospective buyer to stop by for a demo.

For example the background and foreground pictures at

http://www.resolution-loudspeakers.co.uk

don't agree with each other.

it would be helpful, and easily fixed if you would identify which ones?

my apologies - I dont come accross as a polished retail-minded company,
because it is more like a startup company operating on a limited budget,
with I might say a world-beating product. My engineering/invention might
beat the world, but my spellin certainly woul'dnt.

by the way can you provide a link to any loudspeaker you think look better?

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:41:57 +0000 (UTC), "Nick"
wrote:

it is obvious and undeniable that it uses a single drive unit, and a more
efficient TL that have EVER been seen before. even on paper - this has to be
the best imaging, soundstage and realistic loudspeaker for HF/MF with clear
but light bass.

Absolute nonsense. You cannot derive that conclusion from the
evidence and that kind of hyperbole is the reason that many of us are
only too happy to criticize.

I dont think it is therefore 'preposterous' to claim "the
worlds best loudspeaker under 12 inches wide", or "worlds best loudspeaker
in terms or realism" (assuming you dont think that the most important part
of any living room destined loudspeaker is the bass loudness)

I think it's preposterous for many reasons.

The only reason I decided to chuck in a well paid consulting occupation, and
spend everything and all my time on making and marketing this loudspeaker is
because it SOUNDED so MUCH more realistic and clear than anything I ever
heard except possibly headphones. since then, I have patented, developed the
finish, sold pairs, and got them accepted by fussy dealers as the clearest
thing in the shop, and also gone about buying/borrowing world standard
equipment to perform controlled listening and measurement testing on better
known standards.

Good for you. All you need to do now is to continue your efforts by
tempering your speech so that you do not come off as a fool for making
unwarranted claims.

FYI yesterday I completed an inital investigation by measurement to conclude
that there was no measurable tone distortion from CD data to loudspeaker
input, so therefore my suspicions were proven that the equalisation done
during production was responsible for most recordings sounding clear and
bright on the Resolutions, and not inferior engineering. Since the
resolutions FR is relatively flat between 5k-18khz, it must be that other
manuf have used inferior tweeters or attenuated them for the market's
taste - this is apparent from retailer feedback. Conversely what the
resolutions do - for the first time I believe, is give you an accurate
performance of tone and realism that is on the recording - not what you
neccesarily find most comfortable.
bit like WYSIWYG - WYRIWYG (recorded).

the resolution doesnt seem to suit the mainstream bland taste(re high street
hifi dealers) - it is for the conoisseur, audiophile - those who would spoil
the pleasure of easy listening, just to experience fantastic realistic
reproduction on more selective recordings, and study in detail what was
performed/recorded, not just 'listen to music'.

Cop out.

Kal

There is little point in continuing to argue this, because no one in this group
is able to actually hear the speakers, which would pretty much resolve (joke
intended) the issue.

I am an ex-Stereophile reviewer. I have plenty of experience with live
recording, so I know (???!!!) what sounds "realistic," and I have plenty of
master tapes that, to a greater or lesser degree, capture that realism.

If you would loan me a pair of these speakers, I would be happy to give a fairly
objective review and report back to this group what I find. My main system is
Krell/Apogee (not exactly chopped liver), and I have good Stax headphones as
well.

While he is an ex-Stereophile reviewer, he probably still knows
(???!!!) what sounds realistic. ;-)

Send them to him; I'd love to hear his assessment..

Kal

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:59:36 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

There is little point in continuing to argue this, because no one in this group
is able to actually hear the speakers, which would pretty much resolve (joke
intended) the issue.

I am an ex-Stereophile reviewer. I have plenty of experience with live
recording, so I know (???!!!) what sounds "realistic," and I have plenty of
master tapes that, to a greater or lesser degree, capture that realism.

If you would loan me a pair of these speakers, I would be happy to give a fairly
objective review and report back to this group what I find. My main system is
Krell/Apogee (not exactly chopped liver), and I have good Stax headphones as
well.

Yes I will arrange a demo with you if possible, please let me contact you -
I assume you are in England
I am mailing you directly with my contact details (which are on the website
anyway)
Nick

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
There is little point in continuing to argue this, because no one in this
group
is able to actually hear the speakers, which would pretty much resolve
(joke
intended) the issue.

I am an ex-Stereophile reviewer. I have plenty of experience with live
recording, so I know (???!!!) what sounds "realistic," and I have plenty
of
master tapes that, to a greater or lesser degree, capture that realism.

If you would loan me a pair of these speakers, I would be happy to give a
fairly
objective review and report back to this group what I find. My main system
is
Krell/Apogee (not exactly chopped liver), and I have good Stax headphones
as
well.

I am trying to
Nick

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
While he is an ex-Stereophile reviewer, he probably still knows
(???!!!) what sounds realistic. ;-)

Send them to him; I'd love to hear his assessment..

Kal

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:59:36 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

There is little point in continuing to argue this, because no one in this
group
is able to actually hear the speakers, which would pretty much resolve
(joke
intended) the issue.

I am an ex-Stereophile reviewer. I have plenty of experience with live
recording, so I know (???!!!) what sounds "realistic," and I have plenty
of
master tapes that, to a greater or lesser degree, capture that realism.

If you would loan me a pair of these speakers, I would be happy to give a
fairly
objective review and report back to this group what I find. My main
system is
Krell/Apogee (not exactly chopped liver), and I have good Stax headphones
as
well.

Could you please explain the difference between "unwarranted claims", and
'warranted claims' -

just to recap: - explained 'technically' and 'logically' why there are good
'reasons' that the resolution is the clearest and best imaging loudspeaker
in the world, and also gone to some effort to publish listening and
measurement results showing how superior they are to world bechmark equip
like ESL57s and Celestion SL6s, Ditton 25s etc. Endorsed by local audiophile
junkies and hi-end dealers as having world class realism, extended bass,
imaging far superior to anything they ever heard (full contact info on
website)

I am left with the conclusion - the 'difference ' for you and many, is to
see it reviewed by a national hifi mag, or backed by a major brand. Fine -
but I would like to just point out that Publishers will not take an interest
because it is not backed by a major brand, or five figure advertising
budget. The publishers are keen to hint that customers who regularly
advertise get 'more editorial interest'. There are also concerns about hi-fi
reviewing integrity. Wow what a subject! lets not even start up that road
please.

N.B. and getting it backed by a major brand would require me selling the
rights - likely to see the product either shelved (because it puts
everything else on the market to shame), or the price hiked up to make it
available to only a few, and not the masses.

Nick


"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:41:57 +0000 (UTC), "Nick"
wrote:

it is obvious and undeniable that it uses a single drive unit, and a more
efficient TL that have EVER been seen before. even on paper - this has to
be
the best imaging, soundstage and realistic loudspeaker for HF/MF with
clear
but light bass.

Absolute nonsense. You cannot derive that conclusion from the
evidence and that kind of hyperbole is the reason that many of us are
only too happy to criticize.

I dont think it is therefore 'preposterous' to claim "the
worlds best loudspeaker under 12 inches wide", or "worlds best
loudspeaker
in terms or realism" (assuming you dont think that the most important
part
of any living room destined loudspeaker is the bass loudness)

I think it's preposterous for many reasons.

The only reason I decided to chuck in a well paid consulting occupation,
and
spend everything and all my time on making and marketing this loudspeaker
is
because it SOUNDED so MUCH more realistic and clear than anything I ever
heard except possibly headphones. since then, I have patented, developed
the
finish, sold pairs, and got them accepted by fussy dealers as the
clearest
thing in the shop, and also gone about buying/borrowing world standard
equipment to perform controlled listening and measurement testing on
better
known standards.

Good for you. All you need to do now is to continue your efforts by
tempering your speech so that you do not come off as a fool for making
unwarranted claims.

FYI yesterday I completed an inital investigation by measurement to
conclude
that there was no measurable tone distortion from CD data to loudspeaker
input, so therefore my suspicions were proven that the equalisation done
during production was responsible for most recordings sounding clear and
bright on the Resolutions, and not inferior engineering. Since the
resolutions FR is relatively flat between 5k-18khz, it must be that other
manuf have used inferior tweeters or attenuated them for the market's
taste - this is apparent from retailer feedback. Conversely what the
resolutions do - for the first time I believe, is give you an accurate
performance of tone and realism that is on the recording - not what you
neccesarily find most comfortable.
bit like WYSIWYG - WYRIWYG (recorded).

the resolution doesnt seem to suit the mainstream bland taste(re high
street
hifi dealers) - it is for the conoisseur, audiophile - those who would
spoil
the pleasure of easy listening, just to experience fantastic realistic
reproduction on more selective recordings, and study in detail what was
performed/recorded, not just 'listen to music'.

Cop out.

Kal

Replied to privately. My comments had nothing to do with the
speakers, which I have not heard, only with the hyperbole in the
offering.

Kal


On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:10:14 +0000 (UTC), "Nick"
wrote:

Could you please explain the difference between "unwarranted claims", and
'warranted claims' -

just to recap: - explained 'technically' and 'logically' why there are good
'reasons' that the resolution is the clearest and best imaging loudspeaker
in the world, and also gone to some effort to publish listening and
measurement results showing how superior they are to world bechmark equip
like ESL57s and Celestion SL6s, Ditton 25s etc. Endorsed by local audiophile
junkies and hi-end dealers as having world class realism, extended bass,
imaging far superior to anything they ever heard (full contact info on
website)

I am left with the conclusion - the 'difference ' for you and many, is to
see it reviewed by a national hifi mag, or backed by a major brand. Fine -
but I would like to just point out that Publishers will not take an interest
because it is not backed by a major brand, or five figure advertising
budget. The publishers are keen to hint that customers who regularly
advertise get 'more editorial interest'. There are also concerns about hi-fi
reviewing integrity. Wow what a subject! lets not even start up that road
please.

N.B. and getting it backed by a major brand would require me selling the
rights - likely to see the product either shelved (because it puts
everything else on the market to shame), or the price hiked up to make it
available to only a few, and not the masses.

Nick


"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:41:57 +0000 (UTC), "Nick"
wrote:

it is obvious and undeniable that it uses a single drive unit, and a more
efficient TL that have EVER been seen before. even on paper - this has to
be
the best imaging, soundstage and realistic loudspeaker for HF/MF with
clear
but light bass.

Absolute nonsense. You cannot derive that conclusion from the
evidence and that kind of hyperbole is the reason that many of us are
only too happy to criticize.

I dont think it is therefore 'preposterous' to claim "the
worlds best loudspeaker under 12 inches wide", or "worlds best
loudspeaker
in terms or realism" (assuming you dont think that the most important
part
of any living room destined loudspeaker is the bass loudness)

I think it's preposterous for many reasons.

The only reason I decided to chuck in a well paid consulting occupation,
and
spend everything and all my time on making and marketing this loudspeaker
is
because it SOUNDED so MUCH more realistic and clear than anything I ever
heard except possibly headphones. since then, I have patented, developed
the
finish, sold pairs, and got them accepted by fussy dealers as the
clearest
thing in the shop, and also gone about buying/borrowing world standard
equipment to perform controlled listening and measurement testing on
better
known standards.

Good for you. All you need to do now is to continue your efforts by
tempering your speech so that you do not come off as a fool for making
unwarranted claims.

FYI yesterday I completed an inital investigation by measurement to
conclude
that there was no measurable tone distortion from CD data to loudspeaker
input, so therefore my suspicions were proven that the equalisation done
during production was responsible for most recordings sounding clear and
bright on the Resolutions, and not inferior engineering. Since the
resolutions FR is relatively flat between 5k-18khz, it must be that other
manuf have used inferior tweeters or attenuated them for the market's
taste - this is apparent from retailer feedback. Conversely what the
resolutions do - for the first time I believe, is give you an accurate
performance of tone and realism that is on the recording - not what you
neccesarily find most comfortable.
bit like WYSIWYG - WYRIWYG (recorded).

the resolution doesnt seem to suit the mainstream bland taste(re high
street
hifi dealers) - it is for the conoisseur, audiophile - those who would
spoil
the pleasure of easy listening, just to experience fantastic realistic
reproduction on more selective recordings, and study in detail what was
performed/recorded, not just 'listen to music'.

Cop out.

Kal

Endorsed by local audiophile
junkies and hi-end dealers as having world class realism, extended bass,
imaging far superior to anything they ever heard

You can't talk about magazines not being totally forthright and then state that
your high end dealers are the end all. Most high end dealers are only behind a
product because of a guarantee from the manufacture that they will have a semi
exclusive. Hence the high end dealer loves the product because he makes full
margin.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"No shirt, no skirt, full service"

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 10:54:05 -0500, Kalman Rubinson
wrote:

Replied to privately. My comments had nothing to do with the
speakers, which I have not heard, only with the hyperbole in the
offering.

Well, I tried but your Compuserve ISP rejects my e-mails.

Kal

Please take a few moments and read the Bose 901 thread currently in
rec.audio.misc before making a purchase.
Or do a basic Google search for the overwelming bad opinions of Bose
products.

Finally, go listen and compare. If you are happy with you audio system,
then to hell with the world and what music really sounds like.


"Peter Sammon" wrote in message
...
"Sparky" wrote in
:




Bose 901s without a doubt. Please audition these gems and you'll see why.
Detailed powerful reproduction of sound. Curved and contoured cabinets.
Pleasure to behold visually and sonically. No speaker is perfect but this
one approaches that ever so elusive speaker designer's dream of capturing
the "LIVE PERFORMANCE" perhaps better than anything else!

http://www.epinions.com/content_105506836100