What are the most overrated speaker brands, IYO? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : What are the most overrated speaker brands, IYO?



Widowmaker
04-07-2005, 12:22 PM
Maybe "overrated" is too strong a word, how about heard a brand name speaker and thought afterwards, "What's the big deal?" Here are mine:

-Martin Logan: nice looking, but weak, almost non-existent low range/bass

-Mirage Omnisats: still has the tinny, home-theater-in-a-box sound

-Boston Acoustics: too bright, sounds like treble and mids are turned up too high

-Bose: gee, do you guys have all afternoon?

bwithers
04-07-2005, 04:16 PM
I'll second the Martin Login's. I listened to the $8K a pair set and was not impressed for that kind of cash.

paul_pci
04-07-2005, 05:15 PM
M&K. I listened to this guy drone on and on how studios use M&K, all the while thiinking if I had to work in one of those studios, I'd quit my job.

drseid
04-07-2005, 06:11 PM
I'll also agree with both ML and Bose...

Logan's definitely seem to be an acquired taste, but to those that like them, they tend to *love* them...

They are my brother-in-law's favorite speakers... When I heard several of their higher priced models (in a couple different stores, no less) they always left me cold. I guess it just comes down to personal taste.

In the case of Bose, the less said the better...

For some reason, I also have never been able to enjoy Polk speakers... Again, I am sure that it is just my own tastes, and not that Polks are "bad" speakers, per se.

---Dave

JamezHill
04-08-2005, 12:48 AM
Bang & Olefson

N. Abstentia
04-08-2005, 03:25 AM
Of course I'll agree with Bose, but I'll also agree with M&K. It's been 5 years and I'm STILL waiting to hear an M&K speaker that sounds good.

A-Audiophile
04-08-2005, 05:39 AM
Maybe "overrated" is too strong a word, how about heard a brand name speaker and thought afterwards, "What's the big deal?" Here are mine:

-Martin Logan: nice looking, but weak, almost non-existent low range/bass

-Mirage Omnisats: still has the tinny, home-theater-in-a-box sound

-Boston Acoustics: too bright, sounds like treble and mids are turned up too high

-Bose: gee, do you guys have all afternoon?

I have to agree with your list ESP.....Bose.

shokhead
04-08-2005, 05:42 AM
Bose. Then the second list.

IRG
04-08-2005, 06:40 AM
I think many of the overrated brands are from many of the very high end companies that are no longer in business in 2-3 years because their products while may sounding very good, are often times only small fraction of a hair better (in the eyes of reviewers who are getting their advertising dollars) but are so far overpriced that once the "buzz" wears off, the company goes belly up. And as an owner, your depreciation is very substantial very quickly.

And yes, Bose sucks, and as a former owner, I can readily admit this. However, their resale value is quite good (thanks eBay!).

kexodusc
04-08-2005, 06:46 AM
I've always had a beef with Definitive Technology...but they're not as overrated as Bose.

Eric Z
04-08-2005, 08:55 AM
Those darn Orbs I keep hearing about- just bustin' your chops, Hershon! haha!!

The Bang & Olefson speakers don't do too much for me. At their price, I would expect them to be absolutely amazing!

topspeed
04-08-2005, 09:48 AM
The "B" word, obviously.

I've actually heard the B&O Beosystem 5 on a number of ocassions and have always came away very impressed, although I'll admit most of their line is more show than go.

M&K definitely makes the list.

I can see how people would put DefTech here and indeed, I don't particularly care for their sound either (great subs tho :)). However, I wouldn't neccessarily say they were "overrated" as their prices aren't in the stratosphere and for what they specialize in, which is building bi-polar speakers they are quite good at it.

I think some B&W's (the 700's) and Paradigms (Monitor line) are overrated. Regardless of what the press says, IME better speakers can be had at the respective price points.

Vandersteen simply baffles me. Here is a company that has serious cred in the hi-end arena and yet their speakers leave me completely cold. Same with Sonus Faber. Both are the epitome of "laid back" with the SF's throwing in a good deal of color for good measure. The SF's are beautiful to be sure, but it seems like the considerable coin that you have to shell out pays more for the cabinetry and lineage than the sound quality.

I would consider just about any speaker over $25K to be overrated, truth be told. There comes a point where diminishing returns comes seriously into play and this price point seems to be about it. Actually, a very good argument could be made that $5K is the breaking point. This is not to say the Grand Utopia Be's ($80K) or VR11se's ($160k) aren't great speakers; they are. They are simply not 3 to 7 times better than...oh...say a WP7.

Florian
04-08-2005, 10:09 AM
Well obviously the "B". I think M&K is awsome in a dedicated THX Home Theater. Not for music, but for a crrectly placed HT they are it for me. Another one is B&W for me and also B&O..... i also think that Infinity is overrated. They were awsome back in the day, but not there new ones.

-Flo

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 10:12 AM
Just in my limited exposure, probably Wilson Audio. I listened to the Wilson Sophias, and could not believe that those things cost $10k+. The sound was okay, but at least 5x overpriced for what it delivered. For all the hype and positive press that Wilson has accumulated in recent years, that listening was very disappointing.

And going back several years, I thought the Apogee full range ribbon speakers were also vastly overrated. Almost unanimous acclaim from the audiophile press, yet to my ears they just drained the life out of almost all non-classical music.

Bose is not overrated, so much as overexposed, overpriced, and overly promoted. Their bookshelf speakers are okay for what they are, but most of their other products are way overpriced for the performance that they deliver. Same can be said for Bang & Olufsen.

Florian
04-08-2005, 10:16 AM
I think that a lot has to do with the rooms, electronics and type of music. For instance, the Wilsons require a special setup procedure which they use "WASP" and the Apogee's are one of the most critical speakers of our time. Only a handfull of AMPS can drive the FR or the Scintilla. Also moving them by an inch has a huge effect on the sound. Same with the Wilsons. Most speakers need to be heard at home, in order to sound good.

-Flo

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-08-2005, 10:17 AM
Totally disagree about the M&K's I am listening to them right now between news breaks and they sound terrific. They don't sound quite as good as my home system, but they are damn good in their own right. The must be properly setup and calibrated to sound their best.

I believe that any speaker that costs $10,000 for a pair is a rip off. It doesn't take that kind of money to make a pair of excellent sounding speakers.

The speaker that I thought sounded terrible(but it measure very well) was the Wilson WATT speaker. It sounded dry as powder, etchy and clinical. Not worth the money.

Planar and ribbon speakers are also very overrated to me. They measure terribly, and you can hear it. For those who own these kinds of speakers, this is not a dig. Different strokes for different folks.

shokhead
04-08-2005, 10:42 AM
Well obviously the "B". I think M&K is awsome in a dedicated THX Home Theater. Not for music, but for a crrectly placed HT they are it for me. Another one is B&W for me and also B&O..... i also think that Infinity is overrated. They were awsome back in the day, but not there new ones.

-Flo

So they would sound different in a non THX HT?

Florian
04-08-2005, 10:46 AM
So they would sound different in a non THX HT?
Well the THX program discusses positioning and room treatments. M&K speakers have a very limited vertical dispersion but a large horizontal one. If you do not setup the speakers correctly and use the wrong crossover frequencys (depending on Ultra, Non Ultra select etc) than yes they will sound differently at the listening position.

-Flo

kexodusc
04-08-2005, 10:59 AM
I believe that any speaker that costs $10,000 for a pair is a rip off. It doesn't take that kind of money to make a pair of excellent sounding speakers.


Amen to that!!!

But, for anyone with $10,000 to spend on speakers, I've got a set you've GOT to listen to... :D

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 11:11 AM
I think that a lot has to do with the rooms, electronics and type of music. For instance, the Wilsons require a special setup procedure which they use "WASP" and the Apogee's are one of the most critical speakers of our time. Only a handfull of AMPS can drive the FR or the Scintilla. Also moving them by an inch has a huge effect on the sound. Same with the Wilsons. Most speakers need to be heard at home, in order to sound good.

-Flo

You can make the setup argument for just about any speaker. I just think the Wilsons that I listened simply did not measure up to their lofty price tag. These speakers were in a treated demo room with Theta Dreadnoughts driving them, and I was using a 96/24 DAD of Gershwin pieces as the source. The guys at that particular store are meticulous about how they setup their demo sets, so I doubt the setup is at issue. That store only picked up Wilson after Dunlavy went out of business, and IMO the Dunlavys represented a much better value at that price point.

The Apogees were setup in a store where a friend of mine worked, so we tweaked and moved and did all sorts of different listenings with them. We tried them with Audio Research monoblocks, tube preamps, hybrid amps, Haflers, Carvers, SAEs, and even receivers. The results were consistently underwhelming to my ears. Fine with classical, but play something with percussion and amplified instruments and it was slumber time. I also spent a lot of time with the Carver Amazings, which were a hybrid ribbon design, and those sounded far better IMO. Given how many people piled over one another to praise the Apogees back in the day, that's why they epitomize my personal definition of overrated.

Florian
04-08-2005, 11:45 AM
Every single piece that you have mentioned with not work on the Scinitlla. They are a 0.88ohm to 1ohm impedance. If you have bridged them to 4ohm that you loose all the magic of the speaker. Also there is no tube amp that can drive the Scintilla for longer than a couple of minutes. You need Krell (big ones), ML or Ice H2O AMPs to drive them. Now while the Wilson is discussable for me, the Apogee's are not. Every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible. Dynamics, bass etc.. are no issue with these speakers. Also i asume the room was treated, which is another huge issue with Apogge's since they need refective surfaces.

-Flo

Quagmire
04-08-2005, 12:06 PM
Well obviously the "B". I think M&K is awsome in a dedicated THX Home Theater. Not for music, but for a crrectly placed HT they are it for me. Another one is B&W for me and also B&O..... i also think that Infinity is overrated. They were awsome back in the day, but not there new ones.

-Flo
I agree completely. One of the nicest sounding Home Theater setups that I've ever heard was an M&K system setup to THX standards. LIke you, I don't believe this setup would be good for music but it was dynamite for HT.

One of the topics that comes up from time to time around here is THX and whether or not it is "worth it". As far as buying a THX receiver just because of the certification, I say no. But I also make the point that you've made here... that in order for THX to be truly appreciated you have to do more, much more, than just buy an isolated piece of THX equipment. It is a synergy of equipment, placement, room, etc... so that the whole is greater than the sum of all its parts.

I even agree with you about Infinity -- they were something back in the day.

Q

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 12:32 PM
Every single piece that you have mentioned with not work on the Scinitlla. They are a 0.88ohm to 1ohm impedance. If you have bridged them to 4ohm that you loose all the magic of the speaker. Also there is no tube amp that can drive the Scintilla for longer than a couple of minutes. You need Krell (big ones), ML or Ice H2O AMPs to drive them. Now while the Wilson is discussable for me, the Apogee's are not. Every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible. Dynamics, bass etc.. are no issue with these speakers. Also i asume the room was treated, which is another huge issue with Apogge's since they need refective surfaces.

-Flo

The listenings at my friend's store were the ones where I knew about the amplification being used and the front end sources. The ones that I was listening to were the full-range ribbons and Duettas from the mid-80s (Apogee made more than just the Scintillas that you're about to acquire). And how would all of those amps not work with a set of Apogees? The Audio Research monoblocks of that era were perfectly capable of driving loads down to 1 ohm impedance, and none of the listenings I did even remotely came close to clipping. I'd also heard them at audio shows hooked into any number of different configurations. Again, consistently underwhelming playback to my ears.

Someone who praises the Apogees would likely have a preference for the type of sound that they deliver. I have no issue with that. But, given that this thread is about overrated speaker brands, that's my assessment when I weigh the amount of praise that they receive versus how I assessed them upon listening. You're making it sound like it's impossible not to like them, and coming up with any number of reasons why I have the opinion that I do. Even under the best of circumstances in the conditions that you prescribe, there's still the possibility that I simply won't like them then either. If you like them and praise them to high heaven, fine, but that doesn't mean that everybody shares that view.

edtyct
04-08-2005, 12:33 PM
I loved the Apogee Duettas with Krell amplification. I like what I heard years ago of M&K's subs. Speakers are so dependent on room, power, front-end, and mood, don't you think it's hard to evaluate them without putting their best foot forward? How many of us can do that very often?

I agree with Woochifer: How can Bose speakers be overrated when no one who rates speakers, whether professional or not, seems to like them. The people who buy them are mostly sold by marketing; they generally aren't the ones likely to do evaluations. I'm not into bashing anyone's tastes or preferences, but I mistakenly went to a newsgroup about home audio when I meant to visit a pro one. I dropped in on a message that read, "Bose can sound good in a small room." The next comment was, "A toilet?" A little audio comedy can go a long way.

Ed

Florian
04-08-2005, 12:36 PM
I understand that and accept that, i just find it unacceptable that a company which made High End and defined the standards of that time is to be tossed in the same thread with BOSE or other speaker companys. Same as Wilson Audio. The next thing will properbly be Genesis and the Infinity IRS too just because they cost an arm and a leg.

-Flo

SlumpBuster
04-08-2005, 12:39 PM
No one has mentioned the venerable Klipsch? I know a number of shops in my area that dropped Klipsch as a product line. One salesman claimed it was because they couldn't compete with Paradigm and B&W on the showfloor. I just think they shot themselves in the foot when the put entry level stuff in Best Buy. At least Yamaha is wise enough to maintain two "different" reciever lines for marketing purposes, one for stereo shops, one for Best Buy, ect.

Florian
04-08-2005, 12:48 PM
No one has mentioned the venerable Klipsch? I know a number of shops in my area that dropped Klipsch as a product line. One salesman claimed it was because they couldn't compete with Paradigm and B&W on the showfloor. I just think they shot themselves in the foot when the put entry level stuff in Best Buy. At least Yamaha is wise enough to maintain two "different" reciever lines for marketing purposes, one for stereo shops, one for Best Buy, ect.
Klipsch makes some very special loudspeaker which sing beautifully with tubes. But unfortunatly most stores you regualr equipment like Sony, Denon, Onkyo etc.. or B&K which dont match good with them. I like the Cornwalls, which another member owns in the gallery. They are very dynamic.

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 01:04 PM
I understand that and accept that, i just find it unacceptable that a company which made High End and defined the standards of that time is to be tossed in the same thread with BOSE or other speaker companys. Same as Wilson Audio. The next thing will properbly be Genesis and the Infinity IRS too just because they cost an arm and a leg.

-Flo

Nah, I don't have anything against classes of speakers just because they cost a lot or have a particular design. I mean, the best speaker I've heard in recent years was the Dynaudio Evidence Master. $80,000 for a pair of speakers, and praised by just about everyone, but IMO not overrated for the sound that they delivered.

And at one of the audio shows I attended several years ago, I did get a chance to listen to the Infinity IRS -- easily the best of that or any other show from that era. Again, that was a speaker that lived up to its lofty expectations.

For this thread, I don't think that it's appropriate to include Bose anyway, because outside of Consumer Reports, I don't know anybody who rates them at the top of their class. Hard to be overrated, when not a whole lotta people rate them at the top to begin with.

Apogee and Wilson Audio get plenty of praise, and I just happened not to agree with it. The Dynaudio Evidence and Infinity IRS also get plenty of praise, and in those cases, I think it's well deserved.

Florian
04-08-2005, 01:13 PM
Thats exactly what i find so interesting, in two reviews of the Apogee Scintilla they were compared and voted better than the Infinity IRS. They were more dynamic, better integration and sounded more real than the Infinity. I realy do not understand your comments on the Apogee's in general since they are all quite different than what i have heard. You are the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever. I realy asume, and believe that the Apogee's you listend to where setup wrong, wrong electonics or something. Because your observation does not match anybody elses. Also the Dynaudio is definetly not woth 80K$!! The integration between the drivers in not seemless and has not the "airy" midrange that or the transient midrange to tweeter response from a Ribbon or electrostatic speaker. In my opinion, that is one of those totally overprized speaker systems of our time. They are awsome, but they dont sound like 80K and this is the reason why i add Dynaudio.

I think that we all made a mistake in saying "worst brands", we should have said "worst model". Because every company has its totally overpriced speakers.

-Flo

PS: As for overprized speakers i would add Apogee "The Grand" for 160K, Dynaudio Master for 130K (german price), Wilson Audio MaxII 180K, AN flagship 130K (i think) and the Martin Logan Statment E2 for 250K i think.

All of those systems are awsome, but very very expensive and in realtion to what they do "overprized".

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 01:26 PM
No one has mentioned the venerable Klipsch? I know a number of shops in my area that dropped Klipsch as a product line. One salesman claimed it was because they couldn't compete with Paradigm and B&W on the showfloor. I just think they shot themselves in the foot when the put entry level stuff in Best Buy. At least Yamaha is wise enough to maintain two "different" reciever lines for marketing purposes, one for stereo shops, one for Best Buy, ect.

I don't think Klipsch will make too many overrated lists because I think people generally know what their strengths and weaknesses are and freely acknowledge them. Their K-Horns have a huge legion of fans (myself included), but even the most ardent K-Horn fan will acknowledge its imperfections. The speakers that are asking for the "overrated" tag are probably the ones that more frequently get cited as reference speakers or the best in their class.

As much as I like the Dynaudio Evidence and see how often it's regarded as a near perfect speaker, I'm sure that others will regard them as overrated. Same thing goes for Wilson Audio, Vandersteen, Thiel, B&W, and others. I know people who feel that Vandersteen is the truest representation of sound out there, while others can't stand them. Even frequently cited value performers like Paradigm will have their detractors who will call them overrated.

And back to Klipsch, they are actually following Yamaha's two-tiered strategy. Basically, the Synergy series goes to Best Buy, while their Reference series and vintage products go to the specialty dealers. It's no different than how Yamaha distributes only the entry level receivers to mass merchants, and reserves their higher midlevel and flagship products for their specialty dealers.

I don't know if you can say that Klipsch can't compete with B&W and Paradigm, because they do (Klipsch claims to be the best selling specialty speaker brand). In fact, their efficiency puts them at an advantage in A/B comparisons because they will be 5-10 db higher. Retailers are very sensitive about who else carries the products that they sell, and Klipsch is treading a very fine line if they want to keep their dealer network intact. Yamaha's held their network together, but they have lost some stores in recent years. JBL's a case study in what not to do when a decision is made to go after mass market distribution. When they went mass market, they got dropped in droves (just in time for the Canadian companies to emerge and fill that market segment) and now it's pretty much only the mass merchants like BB that carry their products in the U.S.

Also keep in mind that Klipsch dropped a lot of their dealers last year because they caught those stores reselling speakers to unauthorized mail order/internet vendors.

Florian
04-08-2005, 01:49 PM
Not to turn this into a Apogee Scintilla thread, but this is a quote from a Stereophile reivew.


But, don't think the Scintillas are the speaker that will make every audiophile's life a bed of roses. No speaker is more demanding of the right setup. The Scintillas are the ideal speaker for Indiana Jones: you don't just buy a speaker, you begin an adventure. You must be willing to acquire the right electronics to drive this speaker (at 1-ohm), you must be willing to get the right cables (which last month's issue should make you realize is work), you may have to screw endlessly with VTA-and on top of all that you'll need one hell of a lot of patience, and maybe a new listening room! Few speakers can sound worse in the face of determined ignorance. With the wrong electronics and positioning, the Scintillas can easily degenerate into producing an unnatural sound, ending up as little more than a high end curiosity.

They also are not going to be easy to audition adequately outside of your home. The speakers weighs 140Ibs each, and they require far more space and care than most dealers can afford to provide. Even in the best dealer showroom I know of - and I cheerfully admit to a horrendous bias and conflict of interest based on the fact that Bobby Taylor of Excalibur Audio is a close personal friend - the Scintillas are demonstrated at a level of performance that only roughly approximates how well they sound in my living room. Most dealers will either have to sell them on their looks (splendid!) or on the pure technology

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 01:55 PM
Thats exactly what i find so interesting, in two reviews of the Apogee Scintilla they were compared and voted better than the Infinity IRS. They were more dynamic, better integration and sounded more real than the Infinity. I realy do not understand your comments on the Apogee's in general since they are all quite different than what i have heard. You are the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever. I realy asume, and believe that the Apogee's you listend to where setup wrong, wrong electonics or something. Because your observation does not match anybody elses.

And I think this is where you are getting off track. You are presuming why I don't like the Apogees (I have not heard the Scintillas, so I cannot comment on that particular model) as if it's impossible not to like them. Sorry, but for the type of listening that I do, they did not fit. And the opinions that you're drawing from are mostly people who own the speakers or are big fans of them. The Apogees have been discontinued since the mid-90s, so not a whole lot of people with a less emotionally attached viewpoint have been able to hear them recently.

It does not matter if you found a couple of reviews that praised the Scintillas more than the Infinity IRS -- again, those are OPINIONS. I heard the Apogee full range and the IRS at the same audio show (using different electronics and in different rooms), and for my listening, it wasn't even close. The IRS happened to fit my preferences, while the Apogees did not, and consistently left me scratching my head as to what all the hype was about. If you say it's all in the electronics, then how come every Apogee setup at a high end audio show and at the store where my friend worked gave me the same impression?

I'm not faulting anyone for enjoying the Apogees or any other ribbon speaker for that matter. It's just that in all my listenings, I've only liked one ribbon speaker and that happened to be a hybrid model with a dynamic subwoofer. Other speakers with ribbon tweeters I've also liked.


Also the Dynaudio is definetly not woth 80K$!! The integration between the drivers in not seemless and has not the "airy" midrange that or the transient midrange to tweeter response from a Ribbon or electrostatic speaker. In my opinion, that is one of those totally overprized speaker systems of our time. They are awsome, but they dont sound like 80K and this is the reason why i add Dynaudio.

In a large room, the Evidence Master was about as close to a perfect rendering from top to bottom as I have ever heard. It added a new dimension of listening and revealed new details from all of my test discs, with no audible flaws. I cannot say this about any other speaker that I have heard in the last decade. All of the planar and panel speakers that I've heard recently had audible flaws or inconsistencies of some kind, but that applies to all other speakers that I've heard as well.

I'm not going to spend $80,000 of a pair of speakers, but at least the Evidence Master can make a case for itself IMO.

Florian
04-08-2005, 02:05 PM
In a large room, the Evidence Master was about as close to a perfect rendering from top to bottom as I have ever heard. It added a new dimension of listening and revealed new details from all of my test discs, with no audible flaws. I cannot say this about any other speaker that I have heard in the last decade. All of the planar and panel speakers that I've heard recently had audible flaws or inconsistencies of some kind, but that applies to all other speakers that I've heard as well.

I'm not going to spend $80,000 of a pair of speakers, but at least the Evidence Master can make a case for itself IMO.
Thats what i disagree on, the Dynaudio does not have a almost perfect integration of the drivers nor does it reveal more information from the source. Nor are they worth the 80000$ that they ask for them, nor do they make a case for themselves being worth 80K. The Dynaudio is not neutral and has a tendency to sound warm and friendly from my experience with them. The Apogee is about as neutral as one can get, wich again brings me to the crossovers and the modular box design of the master. The Master only has one advantage in my book, and that is that they are relatively easy to setup in most rooms as to where the Apogee's, SoundLab's, Magnepan's or other panel speakers are a lot more difficult. There are only a few true reference speakers in my book and that is the Scintilla, FR (not heard yet), MG20.1, Sound Labs Ultimate and the Genesis 1.1 speaker system.

I think we can agree on the point that we disagree. I seriously dont think that the Master is worth anywhere near the 80000$ asking price, and you think that the Apogee's are overprized. But then again all the Apogee's modells exept the Grand series were affordable, while the Master or Wilson are not.

-Flo

shokhead
04-08-2005, 02:16 PM
Most seems to have the same crap list,what about best bang for the buck speakers?

Florian
04-08-2005, 02:20 PM
This entire thread is absolutly pointless and does not help anyone, no matter how hard we try. Everyone hears different, and what i fnd GODLIKE other people just wont. Lets talk about all the new subscribers that are causing trouble in the forums and gallerys.

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 02:32 PM
I think we can agree on the point that we disagree. I seriously dont think that the Master is worth anywhere near the 80000$ asking price, and you think that the Apogee's are overprized. But then again all the Apogee's modells exept the Grand series were affordable, while the Master or Wilson are not.o

I think something's getting lost in the translation. Wasn't this thread about "overrated" speaker brands?

My comments about Wilson and Apogee were about my listening impressions of those speakers relative to the amount of hype and praise that they receive. The Apogees in their era were some of the most widely acclaimed speakers out there. In my listenings, I simply failed to see the merit of that acclaim, which is why I've long regarded them as overrated. I'm not saying that they're bad speakers, only that in my opinion they don't measure up to the greatness that their proponents claim.

Wilson Audio currently gets the same kind of praise and attention, and based on my listening of the Sophias, I don't think they warrant all the praise that they get either.

I've already said my piece about the Dynaudio Evidence. If it lives up to the hype and high expectations, then it's not overrated IMO, not matter how high the price might be. The Evidence Master might well be overpriced, but it's definitely not overrated.

Florian
04-08-2005, 02:39 PM
First let me say that you cannot base your decision on the worst brands on 1 or two speakers out of their entire range. Secondly, the Master is overhyped and there is no question about it. In my recent Audiophile magazine they received a 25 point rating which mould make it almost as good as the Apogee Studio Grand 27 points (mid Grand sereis) which many consider infirior to the Fullranges. The Scintilla was 10K and acording to this review is better or equal than the Master for 80K, which makes it in my book overhyped and overprized. There is no loss in translation. If you judge a company by 1 product, than i will do the same and herby consider Dynaudio as a overrated brand.

-Flo

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-08-2005, 03:00 PM
First let me say that you cannot base your decision on the worst brands on 1 or two speakers out of their entire range. Secondly, the Master is overhyped and there is no question about it. In my recent Audiophile magazine they received a 25 point rating which mould make it almost as good as the Apogee Studio Grand 27 points (mid Grand sereis) which many consider infirior to the Fullranges. The Scintilla was 10K and acording to this review is better or equal than the Master for 80K, which makes it in my book overhyped and overprized. There is no loss in translation. If you judge a company by 1 product, than i will do the same and herby consider Dynaudio as a overrated brand.

-Flo

Don't equipment reviewers in mags have opinions like we do? Comparing reviews that are months apart is not very informational. A side by side comparison with more than one opinion would be more credible to me.

I do not think any speaker is worth as much as a car, don't care what kind of engineering went into them. Do you really think there is more engineering and parts in a speaker than in a car? These are statement pieces, and I am not sure what statement you are making with a speaker that costs almost as much as a house, and more than a top of the line BMW

Woochifer
04-08-2005, 03:14 PM
First let me say that you cannot base your decision on the worst brands on 1 or two speakers out of their entire range. Secondly, the Master is overhyped and there is no question about it. In my recent Audiophile magazine they received a 25 point rating which mould make it almost as good as the Apogee Studio Grand 27 points (mid Grand sereis) which many consider infirior to the Fullranges. The Scintilla was 10K and acording to this review is better or equal than the Master for 80K, which makes it in my book overhyped and overprized. There is no loss in translation. If you judge a company by 1 product, than i will do the same and herby consider Dynaudio as a overrated brand.

-Flo

Secondly, the Master is overhyped and there is no question about it.

Hmmm, that's a pretty grandiose statement to make considering that in my listening they were about as good a listening as I have heard in the past 15 years. I've never had a comparably revelatory listening experience with any of the Apogee models I've heard (nor too many other speakers in my lifetime for that matter). "No question about it" -- are you somehow elevating your qualitative assessments into the factual rhelm?

It doesn't matter what audio magazine reviews you come up with to support your conclusions. If anything, it just adds to my case about Apogee being overrated, since you're just adding to the hype and the insistent voices that don't correspond to what I've heard in my listenings. The full range models and Duettas that I listened to at length in the mid-80s I regarded as overrated back then, and a new set of reviews does nothing to change that now.

And don't start putting words in my mouth. I've never mentioned Apogee as one of the "worst" brands. I wouldn't even call their speakers bad or mediocre. This thread was about "overrated", and comparing how the Apogees sound in my listenings with how highly they've been rated over the years, that's how I came up with my assessment.

Seems that you're letting your emotions get the better of yourself. You've placed your faith in the Apogees and will defend them to the very end. That's fine, but just don't expect that everybody will be a convert to your temple.

If you want to rate Dynaudio as overrated, I don't care either way. I don't own anything from them, and have no attachment to them one way or another. But, since you're all about rating a company based on their entire lineup, is that opinion of Dynaudio based on just the Evidence line, or does it also include their Audience, Contour, and Confidence lines? Or are you just putting Dynaudio on the overrated list because you somehow think that's a tit-for-tat response to my stated opinion? I would hope it's not the latter, because it would be quite childish if that was the case.

shokhead
04-08-2005, 04:25 PM
This entire thread is absolutly pointless and does not help anyone, no matter how hard we try. Everyone hears different, and what i fnd GODLIKE other people just wont. Lets talk about all the new subscribers that are causing trouble in the forums and gallerys.

Whats up with that? Take a deep breath and calm down. :confused:

RGA
04-08-2005, 05:21 PM
This is a strange thread because overrated and price doesn't necessarily matter or intertwine. The Dynaudio Evidence and B&W Model nautilus are statement products with hefty price tags and sound excellent.

What is a good value to one person may very well be atrocious to another so this thread is just begging for argument. While I probably like the Wilson Sophia more than Woochifer I also can't help agreeing with them that it is grossly overrated simply because at $16,000Cdn I feel you can do better for ~$3k but that doesn't really make the speaker bad but I suppose it sure doesn't mean it should get the glory it does either. I think what is missed here is that one can LIKE a speaker and still feel it's overrated.

Overrated is being mixed up with price and material cost when really it is completely subjective. I always laugh when people say Julia Roberts is overrated -- but not really -- there are actresses and there are stars -- her Star calibur is mixed up with her acting talent -- I happen to like her but I think there are better actresses who are less well known out there...so her stardom rises above her ability. Thus, perhaps Wilson stardom in the Audio press rises above the musicality of the speaker.

Of course try telling that to a Wilson Lover. There are tones of popular speakers I think are overrated - maybe one of the biggest two examples in recent memory are the Snell B-Minor and the Castle Eden and the Martin Logan Aerius i. The latter I actually liked but not for the money the first one to me was a mess and the Eden was overly polite. They all got rave reviews (what doesn't).

The problem here is that since everything gets raves by someone then all we need to fdo is find anything we don;t care for and then "well item A is overrated". I for insance have never been thrilled with Mirage or Vandersteen, Legacy, or the Thiel I heard -- they have huge supporters -- I can't call them overrated because people love them - they're overrated to me because they get lots of praise and they don't generally agree with my tastes -- so I would not put even 1/4 the asking price out for these. Other people would think they're the steals of the century.

Florian
04-08-2005, 11:00 PM
RGA said exactly what i ment.
I consider these brands as overrated to my ears.

1. BOSE
2. Martin Logan
3. B&W
4. Dynaudio
5. Kef
6. AN-K (older model, and may have had the wrong setup)

-----...well pretty much every box exept

1. VMPS (incredibly fast, dynamic, neutral, transparency) thats why i bought it
2. Avalon
3. Kharma
4. Thiehl
5. Genesis
6. Infinity IRS or the old Prelude MTS

The below stated loudspeakers i like, because they are neutral, have a huge soundstage and sound not like a box.

-Flo

chimera128
04-08-2005, 11:18 PM
B&W- Never really cared for their sound much but some people seem to enjoy them. I think they are overpriced for what you get (i think the least expensive nautilus speaker is $1000 for a bookshelf). I do like the way their mid drivers look though.
BOSE- I dont' like anything that rhymes with blows.
DefTech Mythos- They didn't have the soundstage their bipolars have so I was disappointed with the way they sounded. I guess they would work if you wanted a sleek looking speaker to go with a plasma, but i think plasmas just give you more room for bigger speakers =).
I also agree about the Martin Logans though the bass drivers aren't really meant for low bass reproduction. If they reproduced really low frequencies the driver would probably have a problem keeping up with the stat portion. Most people probably buy them for looks.

RGA
04-09-2005, 12:08 PM
RGA said exactly what i ment.
I consider these brands as overrated to my ears.

1. BOSE
2. Martin Logan
3. B&W
4. Dynaudio
5. Kef
6. AN-K (older model, and may have had the wrong setup)

-----...well pretty much every box exept

1. VMPS (incredibly fast, dynamic, neutral, transparency) thats why i bought it
2. Avalon
3. Kharma
4. Thiehl
5. Genesis
6. Infinity IRS or the old Prelude MTS

The below stated loudspeakers i like, because they are neutral, have a huge soundstage and sound not like a box.

-Flo


Of course I don;t feel you can really put the AN K on the list -- Unless you can point to the piles of ga-ga reviews for it. To be overrated people have to Rate-It if you will. AN generally is not a mainstream product and does not actively seek out reviews. The AN K has been selling since 1990 in relative obscurity -- but selling nevertheless.

Bose -- well I don't think they can be on the list for the simple reason that no one overrates them (other than people on forums perhaps).

I might be inclined to agree with ML and Totem not that they;re bad but overpriced IMO for the sonic results you get -- but in both cases sonics isn;t the only or perhaps even the main reason you buy those speakers -- they have striking visual appeal and to many that counts a lot. In fact I'd have to take Castle back because they are not really mainstream in the press either nor did the Eden get universal praise.

And i don;t think you can go after entire companies anyway -- I can find certain B&W and Paradigm products overrated and then in the same breath find some that could be underrated -- the Monitor 3 doesn;t seem to get the notoriaty it perhaps deserves -- at least to me it's a better value than some more touted models.

jrflanne
04-09-2005, 12:12 PM
The "B" word, obviously.



Vandersteen simply baffles me. Here is a company that has serious cred in the hi-end arena and yet their speakers leave me completely cold. Same with Sonus Faber. Both are the epitome of "laid back" with the SF's throwing in a good deal of color for good measure. The SF's are beautiful to be sure, but it seems like the considerable coin that you have to shell out pays more for the cabinetry and lineage than the sound quality.

.

And I really like the Vandersteen sound. I guess that's why there are so many speaker brands out there.

Florian
04-09-2005, 12:14 PM
Well thats exactly what i mean. I did not want to put AN on here, but other members judge entire companys based on one or two speakers. I respect AN electronics a lot for instance eventough they are picky when it comes to matching but nonetheless the turntables and preamps are outstanding regardless of price. I really dont like that Apogee was put there, since they never were a mainstream product and they made High End. But if i have to judge a company by one product, then i have to put AN on there eventough i do not agree with it.

-Flo

RGA
04-09-2005, 01:57 PM
Apogee did get universal press reviews however -- and it should ALWAYS be about the specific product not the whole company based off one product. I can;t speak to the specific Apogee but it is not right to knock the Scintilla based say onan audition of a lower model. There is a But here though. For instance if the lower panel is the same house sound and uses similar design and IF most people who have heard say several agree that they sound very much the same but one has more bass then it's fair to say you might not or you might like others in the line.

The distinction though is important -- you don't judge magnepan off the MMG but if you heard the 3.6 and someone who's owned both tells you the MMG is basically a stripped down version with less bass etc and you're not a bass hound to start with then you would probably have a pretty decent idea what you're in for.

For instance if someone listened to the AN J I feel they would probably have a fair idea of what the E would be like since both speakers are designed similarly and use the same exact drivers and are both ported designs. The K is a sealed box uses a smaller tweeter by a different company, a different woofer by a different company, different surround materials etc. It has an entirely different bass character and isn't nearly as open in the treble - OTOH it isn't nearly as expensive.

Now if you listen to the 100V2 and the 40V2 other than bass there isn;t a whole lot of real difference between the two -- same drivers, same cabinet material, same design concept etc. I heard every speaker in the line.

To save time this go around I listened to the 100V3 and once again the lower models use the same design drivers cabinet materials etc -- so i feel pretty confident I'll know with pretty good accuracy how the lower models will sound - ditto for Energy C series, PSB Stratus Energy etc - basically they add a woofer/crossover point and more immitation wood.

I know of exactly 2 reviews of the AN K that have ever been done -- and one of those was mine (which really doesn't count beyond a few hundred forumers who MIGHT MAYBE bothered to read it). The other review I know of was done in 1992 by Hi-fi Choice which you can't get anywhere now. That is very different from a company that when you type a google search you can get 20 reviews by major magazines with pages of stuff on them.

There are speakers I think are not very good and way overpriced but they are not necessarily overrated...and it's the height of arrogance to think that what I think is overrated actually is overated -- just overrated to me...but then in some ways if you are looking at 10 highly reviewed and hyped $3k speakers and you pick one over the others and you really only liked 3 of them then the other 7 would be overrated to you.

I find nothing in Vandersteen or Thiel that excited me -- they are hyped heavily and to be frank I don't get the praise over Quad panels I've heard over the years.

LEAFS264
04-09-2005, 04:26 PM
This entire thread is absolutly pointless and does not help anyone, no matter how hard we try. Everyone hears different, and what i fnd GODLIKE other people just wont. Lets talk about all the new subscribers that are causing trouble in the forums and gallerys.




Who did you mean?? What kind of trouble??

rozzar
04-11-2005, 01:34 AM
i would say
B&W- the 805s are appalling (!!!)
Bang and Olufsen
Bose
Jamo with exception of D8/Concert series
Cerwin Vega
PMC

theaudiohobby
04-11-2005, 03:36 AM
The Quads are definitely not overrated, for less than ~800USD for a working pair of Quad 57s and suitable amplification it will knock the spots off many loudspeakers, the midrange of this ancient speaker is thoroughly superb, I can see why it has remained popular over the years, it has limitations such as the absence of very deep bass (subwoofer required), limited positioning options (the source of bad sound in many dealer showrooms) and limited loudness capability, but get past those issues and you will be rewarded with superb sound.

Florian
04-11-2005, 10:29 AM
Very true, same as the Martin Logan CLS Panels or the Apogee's. Also Soundlab and Acustat are very special loudspeakers.

-Flo

RGA
04-11-2005, 10:56 AM
The Quads are definitely not overrated, for less than ~800USD for a working pair of Quad 57s and suitable amplification it will knock the spots off many loudspeakers, the midrange of this ancient speaker is thoroughly superb, I can see why it has remained popular over the years, it has limitations such as the absence of very deep bass (subwoofer required), limited positioning options (the source of bad sound in many dealer showrooms) and limited loudness capability, but get past those issues and you will be rewarded with superb sound.

Sorry but I have heard these and the ESL 63 -- I get why people like them but I don't see much value in a speaker whose job is to reproduce music that lacks bass, dynamics, volume capability, and on top of that are tough to position don't like to be integrated to cones are not room friendly and extremely costly to repair if something goes wrong and they are easy to go wrong...I'm not at all surprised that JNR traded his 57s after owning them for 20+ years for the E which does all the things the panels did for him but can play louder with bass dynamics and a more open treble.

The 63 is a nice midrange speaker -- and interestingly the same people who rave about many of these midrange speakers slag tube amps for supposedly being midrange amplifers...curious indeed. Still there is a hollographic quality to these Quads that are I suppose unparalelled in the boxed speaker world --- and if one places a huge emphasis on the importance of this aspect then I suppose there is no substitute --- which is why I understand the appeal.

theaudiohobby
04-12-2005, 12:17 AM
Sorry but I have heard these and the ESL 63 -- I get why people like them but I don't see much value in a speaker whose job is to reproduce music that lacks bass, dynamics, volume capability, and on top of that are tough to position don't like to be integrated to cones are not room friendly and extremely costly to repair if something goes wrong and they are easy to go wrong.
Subwoofer integration issues are not specific to the QUAD. It does not lack dynamics neither does it lack bass only deep bass ( 35Hz -6dB for the 988). Loudness capability and dynamics are two different things completely. All these issues are acknowledged in reviews and by the manufacturer. Considering that the 57 has been out of production for over 20 years, it is a very venerable speaker.

Florian
04-12-2005, 12:22 AM
Many of the here named speakers are true music souls and wrote history. Apogee, Magnepan, Quad, Acustat, Soundlab etc...

Those are systems for true Audiophiles, but there are not many left. Most hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is.

-Flo

drseid
04-12-2005, 01:42 AM
Many of the here named speakers are true music souls and wrote history. Apogee, Magnepan, Quad, Acustat, Soundlab etc...

Those are systems for true Audiophiles, but there are not many left. Most hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is.

-Flo
I have nothing against any of the speakers you just mentioned...

But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?

I would not presume one way or another whether one person's preferences are somehow superior to another's...

---Dave

theaudiohobby
04-12-2005, 03:02 AM
The 63 is a nice midrange speaker -- and interestingly the same people who rave about many of these midrange speakers slag tube amps for supposedly being midrange amplifers...curious indeed. Still there is a holographic quality to these Quads that are I suppose unparalelled in the boxed speaker world --- and if one places a huge emphasis on the importance of this aspect then I suppose there is no substitute --- which is why I understand the appeal.

the ESL 57 came out when tube amplifiers when the only game in town, QUAD itself still builds tube amplifiers. Owners of these speakers use a variety of amplifiers from both sides of the divide to drive them, so saying that those that praise these speakers slag tube amplifiers is a non-starter.

20to20K
04-12-2005, 05:22 AM
...but there are a few models that I just don't seem to "get".

Like Martin Logans for example. For the amount of praise I've heard and rave reviews I've read I've never heard a pair that sound good to me. Maybe they were not set up right, driven by the right electronics or I was listening to the wrong models but they always sound thin and tinny to my ears. I've listened to the mid range models in the $2500 - $5000 price range extensively in sound rooms and they just don't do it for me.

On a different angle there's the high end Wilson Audio models. I'm not sure how any speaker could ever be worth $200,000 as their top of line model is. I mean what can they do that make them 10 times better than the $20,000 Nautilis 800 or 5 times better than the $40,000 Stradivari's? I haven't heard them so I don't want to sound ignorant about it, but $200K for a pair of speakers? The same amount of money we pay the leader of the free world? The same amount for a family house? The best sports or luxury cars in the world?

Florian
04-12-2005, 05:55 AM
The closer you get to perfection the more expensive it gets. This is not new. All electrosttics, hybrids, fullranges etc.. are very very picky and their owners spend month in setting them up. I have never heard a good Martin Logan until the one fine day i heard a Odysee at my friends shop. Those things are darn picky, and love powerfull tubes. Same as the seating distance has to be at least 15ft for the drivers to integrate correctly. Apogee's are picky, and by moving them 1" they change their sound landscape. Wilson Audio Alexandria, and the Grand Utopia are very fine speakers. Are the Kharma's worth 160K, yes they are to some people. We cannot judge those speakers since we have never heard them in our home and we never played with different electronics.

-Flo

Florian
04-12-2005, 08:27 AM
I have nothing against any of the speakers you just mentioned...

But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?

I would not presume one way or another whether one person's preferences are somehow superior to another's...

---Dave
I consider a person a true audiophile when he meets the following requirements.

1. Matches components based on technical aspects
2. Matches components based on the "character" of each piece.
3. Creates a pleasing Aura to the eye
4. Doesnt rate speakers based on whitepapers and showroom hearings

A true Audiophile system has a certain magical aspect of their sound and doesnt need any papers to prove its goodness..

-Flo

PS: The best speakers in the world to me, are not the ones with great whitepapers.

kexodusc
04-12-2005, 11:26 AM
I consider a person a true audiophile when he meets the following requirements.

1. Matches components based on technical aspects.
Exactly which technical aspects do I have to know to match my CD player or turn-table to my pre-amp?


2. Matches components based on the "character" of each piece..
What about those of us that look for the most faithful reproduction of music possible, ie: equipment without ANY imperfect "character"?


3. Creates a pleasing Aura to the eye
Huh? I could care less how bad it looked as long as it was clean and sounded great. Do you just sit and look at your gear, or do you actually play music?


4. Doesnt rate speakers based on whitepapers and showroom hearings
I would add: pricetag, external reviews, looks, and fundamental design

I'm very disheartened to see that appreciation of music and sound has no place in your list.
My definition would at least include these aspects, and be sure to include people of all incomes. Some of us actually use this stuff to satisfy a passion for music, not as elitist centerpieces on display in our homes.

Florian
04-12-2005, 12:21 PM
Well its all actually very simple. Every single piece of equipment has a character. Thats why component matching is so important. Also matching the output voltage of your pre amp to your power amp is very important. Running either fully balanced or unballanced systems are important.

The speakers that are listed here and commonly recommended are almost in all regards HIFI speakers and are far away from any neutral character. As a matter of fact, the Apogee's i recommended is about as neutral as you can get with the right electronics. B&W's have a warm sound, also does NAD, Cambridge and Rotel. The Japanse electronics have a general hard and unorganic sound. The Italian tubes sound warm, with a sometimes smeared/warm/friendly character which are great in the midrange and height but lack bass speed and dryness.

As for the looks, i was refering to the overall look of the room and the acustics. Very often the components recommend by members are HIFI equipment and pretty much never anyone recommends room tuning which is one of the most critical factors there are.
Also if the room it is in, does not look nice and friendly it will reflect on the mood you are in and the feeling of the music.

Pricetags are pointless, because everyone will buy the best he/she can afford. Audiophiles are all limited to a budget, for some its 20K and 2K for others. Pricetag is not relevant. An Audiophile will make the best out of what he has. Is it possibe to have a Audiophile system on a 2K $ budget. In my opinion, no. But i am sure i will get slammed for that opinion.

Apreciaten of music does not need to be listed, since it comes with the process of becomming a Audio Enthusiast or Audiophile.


Some of us actually use this stuff to satisfy a passion for music, not as elitist centerpieces on display in our homes I find this quite amusing because i am properbly one of the youngest members on this site with some of the most expensive equipment too. Not to say that its the best, but since you mention prictag and income classes. I am 21 now, and have always tuned, treated my room and tried new equipment out. And actually the equipment i recommend i have usually owned.

-Flo

JoeE SP9
04-12-2005, 05:31 PM
Wilson's may not be the most overrated but they certainly must the the most overpriced IMO.

drseid
04-12-2005, 05:54 PM
I consider a person a true audiophile when he meets the following requirements.

1. Matches components based on technical aspects
2. Matches components based on the "character" of each piece.
3. Creates a pleasing Aura to the eye
4. Doesnt rate speakers based on whitepapers and showroom hearings

A true Audiophile system has a certain magical aspect of their sound and doesnt need any papers to prove its goodness..

-Flo

PS: The best speakers in the world to me, are not the ones with great whitepapers.
I appreciate your reply to a tough question Florian...

That said, I think you may be overthinking things to some extent with such specifics as to what makes a "true" audiophile...

In my case, I actually prefer the term "audio enthusiast" to "audiophile"...

I think of an audio enthusiast as one who wants to enjoy their music as much as possible, and actively works to achieve that goal. I don't really give much thought to what "character" my equipment has, or what white papers say (or don't say). Isn't it all about just trying to enjoy the music...? At the end of the day, when it all comes together and you can't wipe that broad smile on your face away when listening to your favorite tunes, you know you have your system matched the way you want and it makes it all worthwhile. Just my 2 cents for what their worth.

---Dave

Woochifer
04-12-2005, 06:10 PM
As for the looks, i was refering to the overall look of the room and the acustics. Very often the components recommend by members are HIFI equipment and pretty much never anyone recommends room tuning which is one of the most critical factors there are.
Also if the room it is in, does not look nice and friendly it will reflect on the mood you are in and the feeling of the music.

Interesting that the look of the room matters so much in the enjoyment of music. Some of the best musical experiences I ever had were in dungeonlike, smoke-filled clubs surrounded by drunks in a mosh pit. In those cases, the power of the music was what mattered. I guess the music would have been a more meaningful experience if I was sitting in a pretty room by myself lisping in willowy clouds surrounded by aesthetic visual beauty.


Pricetags are pointless, because everyone will buy the best he/she can afford. Audiophiles are all limited to a budget, for some its 20K and 2K for others. Pricetag is not relevant. An Audiophile will make the best out of what he has. Is it possibe to have a Audiophile system on a 2K $ budget. In my opinion, no. But i am sure i will get slammed for that opinion.

Consider yourself slammed. You're making a mountain out of a molehill with all of the stereotypes and self-serving labels that you're throwing around. When you start narrowly defining what a "true" audiophile is (gee, and you happened to fit all of those categories, what a coincidence!), you're marginalizing everybody who takes a different approach than what you believe in.


Apreciaten of music does not need to be listed, since it comes with the process of becomming a Audio Enthusiast or Audiophile.

That's a load of BS. Over the years, I've met plenty of "audio enthusiasts" or self-proclaimed "audiophiles" who only care about what stuff sounds like, and squat about the music itself. They've bought into all of the money pit upgrades and tweaks, dumped thousands of dollars into their systems, spent more time and effort setting up their system and tweaking with the sound. Yet, for all that effort put into getting the sound to fit their preferences, they have no appreciation for the music itself. They'll buy the direct-to-disc LPs and pure DSD SACDs, not because they like the music, but because it has stellar audio quality. All you have to do to see this approach in action is look at the type of music that a lot of audio magazine reviewers listen to when they evaluate a system.

Personally, I would rather listen to a master artist like John Coltrane or other music that I like through a battery-powered transistor radio than some wannabee hack who plays crappy music that happens to be well recorded through a "true" audiophile system. Some of the most dedicated and knowledgeable music fans I know listen to their music through less than stellar sounding audio systems. Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced.


I find this quite amusing because i am properbly one of the youngest members on this site with some of the most expensive equipment too. Not to say that its the best, but since you mention prictag and income classes. I am 21 now, and have always tuned, treated my room and tried new equipment out. And actually the equipment i recommend i have usually owned.

Well congrats, so you spent more on your audio systems than any of us did. I guess that's why you're one of the chosen few "true" audiophiles in the world. The rest of us just "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is."

JoeE SP9
04-12-2005, 07:23 PM
Maybe an audiophile is someone with a $300K system and 6 CD's that are all "audiophile" approved. I guess I'm not the one. It's all about the music. If you loose sight of that you are wasting time and money. Most of the music those highly paid reviewers use for evaluating equipment is stuff I wouldn't listen to. I'm going to listen to some Wes now. Easy Groove on Pacific Jazz (vinyl).

JoeE SP9
04-12-2005, 07:32 PM
Florian, where can you get new Apogee's? I thought they went out of business. This should not be taken as a slur on Apogee's. I seriously considered purchasing a pair of Mini Grands I heard at Soundex.

risabet
04-12-2005, 07:46 PM
I've got to list:

1. Bose
2. Polk
3. M&K

What I cant understand is the hard line against Martin-Logan. This is a speaker that is critical in regards to placement, amplifiers and ancillary equipment. When set up correctly M-L's, even the small ones, have good bottom end, are quite dynamic, and of course, image in an amazing fashion. Speakers like these require time and energy to sound their best.

Not to disrespect most dealers but their showrooms suck, the staff is weak and they can't set up a dipole to save their lives. The only fair assessment of dipoles is in the listeners room. The same can be said for Apogee's (which I sold when they were new and may be the most accurate speaker made if driven properly in the right room), Maggies and the Soundlabs and damned near any other dipoles.

RGA
04-12-2005, 08:30 PM
Woochifer

I have to admit your last response to Florian -- well when i see it from the outside looking in I can only imagine what an ASS I must come across as much of the tiime. Rolls eye at self :rolleyes:

Working it on guys.

Florian
04-12-2005, 10:45 PM
I consider this discussion with you at an end, for the simple reason of overreaction. You asume to much, and listen not enough. I was not putting myself into any category,i was simply stating what i think. If you cant handle another persons opinion, than i guess your in the wrong place.

-Flo

Florian
04-12-2005, 10:47 PM
Florian, where can you get new Apogee's? I thought they went out of business. This should not be taken as a slur on Apogee's. I seriously considered purchasing a pair of Mini Grands I heard at Soundex.
Check out www.audiogon.com www.audio-markt-auktion.de and www.apogeespeakers.com and click on usergroups.

-Flo

:-)

Florian
04-12-2005, 10:51 PM
Woochifer

I have to admit your last response to Florian -- well when i see it from the outside looking in I can only imagine what an ASS I must come across as much of the tiime. Rolls eye at self :rolleyes:

Working it on guys.
Well RGA, guess what. I never put anybody down, nor did i place anyone into any category. Nor did i spend over 18K$ for my system. I only said what i liked, and i still get slammed for it.

If i would have bought a B&W 704 with Rotel equipment and would have joined in and screamed bloddy hell to all owners with high pricetag systems i would have been in the club.

-Flo

theaudiohobby
04-13-2005, 04:28 AM
Interesting that the look of the room matters so much in the enjoyment of music. Some of the best musical experiences I ever had were in dungeonlike, smoke-filled clubs surrounded by drunks in a mosh pit. In those cases, the power of the music was what mattered. I guess the music would have been a more meaningful experience if I was sitting in a pretty room by myself lisping in willowy clouds surrounded by aesthetic visual beauty.

Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.


Personally, I would rather listen to a master artist like John Coltrane or other music that I like through a battery-powered transistor radio than some wannabee hack who plays crappy music that happens to be well recorded through a "true" audiophile system. Some of the most dedicated and knowledgeable music fans I know listen to their music through less than stellar sounding audio systems. Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced.
I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.

** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **

This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.

kexodusc
04-13-2005, 05:38 AM
Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.
That's great, but I think the point which you've completey missed was, would you rather better sound at the expense of looks, or vice-versa if the choices are mutually exclusive...looks are nice, and WAF is important, but it's a far distant second to sound in my books...


I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.

Again, we'd all rather have the best stuff, but when the dream ends and we wake up in the morning to our mere mortal systems, can we not still enjoy some pleasure from playing John Coltrane? Or how about with a clock radio? I have clock radio in my office right now that I use quite a bit...if it was so unbearable and gave me no satisfaction, I wouldn't be able to tolerate it..Are you implying that if we enjoy music on lesser systems, we're not audiophiles? If so, please specify which systems, so we can determine if we're audiophiles or not.
If given the choice of a world with music and bad systems, or no music at all, I think most of us would still prefer to have music...



** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **
This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.

I think "overreaching" is a bit excessive. Wooch is quite right...there's people who for some reason buy music they don't particularly like just because it has received excellent studio treatment. These are the people who are just listening to the system. These aren't audiophiles...they're technophiles. They show off to others and themselves the ability of the system, but they don't enjoy the music. The delivery of the sound is more important than the artistic qualities of the music itself.
That's fine, I don't hold anything against these people. But they have a much different goal than you and I.

kexodusc
04-13-2005, 06:01 AM
Well its all actually very simple. Every single piece of equipment has a character. Thats why component matching is so important. Also matching the output voltage of your pre amp to your power amp is very important. Running either fully balanced or unballanced systems are important.
I guess it comes down to semantics, but to me, neutral gear has no "character", unless neutral is a character.
Florian, I just don't accept that people who put less time into chosing their gear, or understand less about their systems can't be considered audiophiles. I know of many systems that were knowingly built on compromises, but the owners enjoy the systems nonetheless...they put a lot of effort into maximizing the performance of what they do have.
They share an appreciation for the art that all this is made for in the first place - music.
Regardless of their systems costs, the brand name, etc, if they share the desire and enthusiasm, I would consider them audiophiles, perhaps with different priorities than others, but audiophiles.



The Japanse electronics have a general hard and unorganic sound
That's funny, a sentence earlier you named a few manufacturers heavy on the Japanese electronics and described them as warm...I think at one point in history your simple stereotyping of electronics was better applied. Today it might be the case in a few components, but it's no longer that simple. More and more manufacturers have product lines where the sonic character differs from model to model.


Pricetags are pointless, because everyone will buy the best he/she can afford. Audiophiles are all limited to a budget, for some its 20K and 2K for others. Pricetag is not relevant. An Audiophile will make the best out of what he has. Is it possibe to have a Audiophile system on a 2K $ budget. In my opinion, no. But i am sure i will get slammed for that opinion.

There are many ways to build an audiophile system...some $2K systems sound better than $20K systems. And vice versa. But you seem to imply that having a so-called "audiophile system" is a necessary component of "being" an audiophile. I couldn't disagree more.

Apreciaten of music does not need to be listed, since it comes with the process of becomming a Audio Enthusiast or Audiophile.

In my case, it long preceded the process of becoming an Audiophile.



I find this quite amusing because i am properbly one of the youngest members on this site with some of the most expensive equipment too. Not to say that its the best, but since you mention prictag and income classes. I am 21 now, and have always tuned, treated my room and tried new equipment out. And actually the equipment i recommend i have usually owned.
-Flo
Not sure why you posted this...but I guess if spending more money than others on gear makes you happy then that's fine. Personally I enjoy spending less money than others on gear while simultaneously arriving at a better sounding system...

One last thing...Can you please explaing "HIFI" to me, I'm not sure I'm understanding it the way you're using it.

theaudiohobby
04-13-2005, 06:17 AM
That's great, but I think the point which you've completey missed was, would you rather better sound at the expense of looks, or vice-versa if the choices are mutually exclusive...looks are nice, and WAF is important, but it's a far distant second to sound in my books...

Interesting state of affairs, I will rather not compromise on any, there have been performances where the environment totally ruined it for me and vice versa where the environment enhanced the musical experience, I will not tolerate bad music and I will barely tolerate a poor environment and only in exception circumstances and to a limited extent. Listening to music in non-optimal environments can be very painful at times irrespective of how great the music is.



Again, we'd all rather have the best stuff, but when the dream ends and we wake up in the morning to our mere mortal systems, can we not still enjoy some pleasure from playing John Coltrane? Or how about with a clock radio? I have clock radio in my office right now that I use quite a bit...if it was so unbearable and gave me no satisfaction, I wouldn't be able to tolerate it..Are you implying that if we enjoy music on lesser systems, we're not audiophiles? If so, please specify which systems, so we can determine if we're audiophiles or not. If given the choice of a world with music and bad systems, or no music at all, I think most of us would still prefer to have music...

I have a satellite radio that I listen to during the week and it puts out some great music from time to time, but at times the lack of fidelity on certain genres is personally unbearable and I turn it off. I can appreciate good music on poor system but I will rather not have to make that choice, In many cases I do not have to make that choice because of the wealth of good quality software and hardware available.
As for the hypothetical question "world with music and bad systems", best to make that kind of choice on a case by case basis.




I think "overreaching" is a bit excessive. Wooch is quite right...there's people who for some reason buy music they don't particularly like just because it has received excellent studio treatment. These are the people who are just listening to the system. These aren't audiophiles...they're technophiles. They show off to others and themselves the ability of the system, but they don't enjoy the music. The delivery of the sound is more important than the artistic qualities of the music itself.
That's fine, I don't hold anything against these people. But they have a much different goal than you and I.

Wooch used an extreme example of technophiles, your definition, to put down Florian comments that the love of music should be default for an audiophile, yes technophiles exist, some even admit to it, but to suggest that because Florian did not state "music appreciation" in his criteria somehow puts him in this category is somewhat overreaching in my opinion. More to the point, the comment ** regardless of how it is reproduced ** is quite simply overreaching, audiophiles enhance their enjoyment of great music by investing in good quality equipment and where available good software, it is that simple.

kexodusc
04-13-2005, 09:27 AM
....but to suggest that because Florian did not state "music appreciation" in his criteria somehow puts him in this category is somewhat overreaching in my opinion.

I'm afraid you've misread Mr. Woochifer, I don't see where he suggests or implies that Florian belongs to this category of technophiles in his post...

theaudiohobby
04-13-2005, 09:43 AM
Agreed, I confused your comments about technophiles with his, therefore apologies to Mr. Woochifer on that point :) , However I do not think I misread him on the second part of that paragraph, so the second part of the last paragraph of my previous post stays. :p

RGA
04-13-2005, 11:26 AM
Actually I think Audiophile is a tem that strictly means Lover(phile) of Audio...being an audiophile itself has nothing to do with loving music.

The one point Woochifer made that I disagree with is that he's pulling a similar superiority complex with what is called good music and what I and florian get hit with on what is good sound reproduction. people can love both music and systems -- and even if they love what Woochifer concludes as musicians as hacks people still may love them -- Remember the Beatles were Hacks to many and to someone like Skeptic(soundmiond) every rock, country,pop singer in the history of time are hacks, so is John Coltrane to him and most of the rest of Jazz if not all of it.

I think there are plenty of people who buy software to show off to their friends how great their system is - or they buy "audiophile approved" recordings to go shop for speakers etc. i bought Patricia Barber Cafe Blue based off it being considered a great recording - it isn't really but that's another issue --- I like female vocals and basically figured it'll probably be good.

After a while it's all just a big mine is better than yours shouting match -- or you only like X because you like innacurate fuzzy sound while ME I chose the technologically advanced Y, and back and forth it goes over and over year in year out and no one gives an inch anyway so you wonder where your life went.

I was buying a record and a cd today at my local used shop and I was tapping my foot to the music they had on get into it while browsing -- I look aup at the speaker and it's stuck on a shelf -- the speaker is part of an Aiwa mini system(ghettoblaster) and hey isn't PRAT the thing that gets you going? Being a music lover and being an audiophile are NOT the same thing -- I can listen to all my CD's quite happily on my laptop with those cheap earbud speakers

--- The Audiophile buyng of stereos is more about having an incredinbly anal outlet ---- interestingly my personality type is so totally not like it is when it comes to Audio (here I border on a type A personality scary.

Woochifer
04-13-2005, 02:51 PM
I consider this discussion with you at an end, for the simple reason of overreaction. You asume to much, and listen not enough. I was not putting myself into any category,i was simply stating what i think. If you cant handle another persons opinion, than i guess your in the wrong place.

-Flo

For someone who's been painting the world with such broad strokes on this thread ("true" audiophiles are this, Italian tubes are that, Japanese electronics are something else, all box speakers except these six brands are overrated, those who are not "true" audiophiles "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is"), it's quite a statement for you to tell someone that they're overreacting.

I can handle other opinions and disagreement just fine. My contentions with your posts are about these presumptions that you make about other peoples' motivations and preferences. You don't share their preferences and priorities, so why would you have any insight as to whether whitepapers influence those preferences or how they don't know what "a speaker with a soul is"? In all my years in the audio hobby, I've never met a single person who bought a speaker based on reading a whitepaper.

I stated on this thread that I've never been bowled over by the Apogees I've heard, so your reaction is to tell me that I'm "the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever." How do you know that? Have you polled every person who's ever listened to them? Ever talk to the sales rep at that store where my friend worked who shared my opinion of the Apogees, or two of my friends who had similar reactions during their listenings?

And when you start saying stuff like "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible" how truthful is that? What if somebody heard the Scintilla and proclaimed a different speaker as the "closest to the real thing"? Does that make them a liar since the universal proclamation of "every single person" would no longer apply? Or are you hereby proclaiming that it's impossible to have a different opinion? Like I said, it's not the opinion, it's the presumption that's at issue here.

Woochifer
04-13-2005, 03:02 PM
Woochifer

I have to admit your last response to Florian -- well when i see it from the outside looking in I can only imagine what an ASS I must come across as much of the tiime. Rolls eye at self :rolleyes:

Working it on guys.

It's always a work in progress. Good to see that you're making headway. LOL


The one point Woochifer made that I disagree with is that he's pulling a similar superiority complex with what is called good music and what I and florian get hit with on what is good sound reproduction. people can love both music and systems -- and even if they love what Woochifer concludes as musicians as hacks people still may love them -- Remember the Beatles were Hacks to many and to someone like Skeptic(soundmiond) every rock, country,pop singer in the history of time are hacks, so is John Coltrane to him and most of the rest of Jazz if not all of it.

Okay, I'll fess up to this one. You're probably right in that I'm conveying a superiority complex about what constitutes good music. I guess I've heard one too many Amanda McBroom albums at audio demos to think straight on this point. :D

Another way of putting it is that there's plenty of great music out there that's poorly recorded, and that I'll listen to through a less than stellar audio system. If it's great music to my ears, then a substandard audio system does not make it any less so. The point of a decent audio system is to increase the enjoyment of the source material. Similarly, a good movie played through a crappy portable TV is still a good movie.

Woochifer
04-13-2005, 03:39 PM
Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.

For punk, alternative, and the various derivatives thereof, that just adds to the experience.



I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.

Sure, I don't disagree with the idea of putting the best foot forward possible for the music that we enjoy. However, I do not make most of my music buying decisions based on the audio quality. For example, I listen to a lot of electronica, but unfortunately most of it is poorly recorded and based on sampled loops. But, the audio quality does not detract from how I personally react to the music. If I enjoy the music, I'm not going to suddenly stop listening to it just because it's not recorded well. This isn't like classical music either where you got multiple interpretations of the same piece. If I want my mind to drift to Sasha's Xpander, I have to go with the original version because there's no one out there doing a remake using DSD streaming.

When given an option, in plenty of cases I'll opt for the best possible audio quality. That's why I have half-speed mastered LPs, 96/24 DADs, and various remastered CDs in my collection. But, I'm not going to go the extra step of buying albums that sound great at the expense of the music itself (exceptions being a few demo discs that I've bought over the years such as The Sheffield Track Record).


** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **

This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.

It's not an oxymoron because to me great music is still great whether I hear it through a cheap boombox or through a million dollar reference system. Besides I was primarily responding to Florian's contention that music appreciation comes with being an audio enthusiast or audiophile, and I simply don't agree that the two go hand in hand.

Sure, I'd prefer to hear it through a decent system, but I'm not going to shut something off just because the playback system is less than ideal. I don't think it's "overreaching" to say that "appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced." Some friends of mine who are big time music buffs (these guys have an overwhelming knowledge of music from all genres, and a genuine passion for it) enjoy it on what most audiophiles would regard as substandard music systems. But, how does their choice of audio systems make them any less appreciative of music in general than somebody who invested more than them on the hardware side?

At home, I've built a system that for my preferences represents the best audio quality within my budget. Listening through that system and other decent quality systems of course adds to the enjoyment. For the past couple of years, I've lived with a less than ideal turntable cartridge. Now that I've replaced it with a better cartridge, I have been listening to my LPs more than before, but it's not like my vinyl collection sat idle before either. Conversely, if the playback is music that I can't stand to listen to, the sound quality won't matter one bit.

The main point that I was making was that appreciation of music and appreciation of sound quality/audio reproduction are not a one-to-one correlation. As I mentioned, I know plenty of music enthusiasts who are passionate about the music, but are less than passionate about how it sounds. Conversely, there are others I've met who obsess about the sound quality, without having any appreciation for the music itself.

thepogue
04-13-2005, 04:42 PM
I forget the model but it could be tri-amped and it listed for 12K...I though the smaller B&W sounded better...

I fdor one really enjoyed the ML's...but they goota be set up correctly...and if they are...whew...nothing like some 'stats'...

Peace, Pogue

RGA
04-13-2005, 05:10 PM
It's always a work in progress. Good to see that you're making headway. LOL



Okay, I'll fess up to this one. You're probably right in that I'm conveying a superiority complex about what constitutes good music. I guess I've heard one too many Amanda McBroom albums at audio demos to think straight on this point. :D

Another way of putting it is that there's plenty of great music out there that's poorly recorded, and that I'll listen to through a less than stellar audio system. If it's great music to my ears, then a substandard audio system does not make it any less so. The point of a decent audio system is to increase the enjoyment of the source material. Similarly, a good movie played through a crappy portable TV is still a good movie.

Agreed -- I am sick and tired of dealers with their specialty recordings and then trying to claim their stereo is so great it makes normal recording totally unlistenable. I am hoping to go to the CES in 2006 (graduate finally after 13 years) and that's my present to me. And I know one room where the guy will play anything and everything from Grieg played by Grieg to Nirvanna to whatever else.

it's funny you mention McBroom -- that was the other artist along with Katrina Gauvin that were "audiophile" recoridngs -- I got barber becausse she is the only one they carry at the cd stores.

The Cafe Blue album has been released on Vinyl -- $74.99 man?

abstracta
04-13-2005, 07:28 PM
But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?




From my experience, an 'audiophile' = somebody who spends $3000+ on a pair of two way speakers, $1000 on cables/interconnects, or, thinks a speaker that dives like a shot shot duck below 45hz is "full range".

My nominees for the topic at hand:

Snell - The brand name even sounds like it would appeal to audio snobs. Although Snell has fallen out of the spotlight the past several years, they were among the masters at 'big box / little driver' speaker design, and knew how to market them. While I've laughed at salesmen pushing Cerwin Vega's using such revered technical jargon as "da Bomb" and "balz", at least the Cerwin's didn't make me yawn like a pair of Snell B minors did.

Definitive Technology - I heard a pair of BP-20's back in the 90's when they first hit the scene, and was amazed by them. Neutral, dynamic, and that awesome soundstage only rivaled by planars. Regretfully, current DT designs suffer from 'boom truck' bass quality, and horribly choppy frequency response likely the result of low end drivers and crossovers. It's a real shame what has happened to DT. I believe this leaves only Mirage in that genre', and I find their sonic quality only marginally better.

Martin Logon - nuff said.

Honorable mention - Any two way conventional cone speaker bigger than two feet tall. I don't care who makes them.

RGA
04-13-2005, 09:06 PM
Well I can't argue with the Snell B Minor or most any Snell after Snell died -- The B-minor was a boring speaker and considering the side firing subwoofer (12inch) and multi way design and the size of the speaker -- you would think it would be better --- after all it was a highly touted Stereohhile Class B rated full range speaker :rolleyes:

Florian
04-13-2005, 10:56 PM
For someone who's been painting the world with such broad strokes on this thread ("true" audiophiles are this, Italian tubes are that, Japanese electronics are something else, all box speakers except these six brands are overrated, those who are not "true" audiophiles "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is"), it's quite a statement for you to tell someone that they're overreacting.

I can handle other opinions and disagreement just fine. My contentions with your posts are about these presumptions that you make about other peoples' motivations and preferences. You don't share their preferences and priorities, so why would you have any insight as to whether whitepapers influence those preferences or how they don't know what "a speaker with a soul is"? In all my years in the audio hobby, I've never met a single person who bought a speaker based on reading a whitepaper.

I stated on this thread that I've never been bowled over by the Apogees I've heard, so your reaction is to tell me that I'm "the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever." How do you know that? Have you polled every person who's ever listened to them? Ever talk to the sales rep at that store where my friend worked who shared my opinion of the Apogees, or two of my friends who had similar reactions during their listenings?

And when you start saying stuff like "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible" how truthful is that? What if somebody heard the Scintilla and proclaimed a different speaker as the "closest to the real thing"? Does that make them a liar since the universal proclamation of "every single person" would no longer apply? Or are you hereby proclaiming that it's impossible to have a different opinion? Like I said, it's not the opinion, it's the presumption that's at issue here.
You asked for my opinion, and thats what you got. Either take it, or leave it. How can you argue with my opinion ? If i were saying that these were facts, then yes. But you cant argue with a personal opinion.

Woochifer
04-13-2005, 11:55 PM
You asked for my opinion, and thats what you got. Either take it, or leave it. How can you argue with my opinion ? If i were saying that these were facts, then yes. But you cant argue with a personal opinion.

Like I said, I'm not arguing opinion. I'm arguing presumption, which has the pretense of fact attached to it. When you react to my opinion by telling me that I'm the "first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever" or "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible," you had damn well better be able to back that up because those sure as hell read like factual statements, rather than mere opinions. I'm simply calling your bluff since blanket statements like that only serve to marginalize opinions that you disagree with. I can handle disagreement, but you don't seem to like having unsubstantiated blanket statements called out for the exaggerations that they are.

Florian
04-14-2005, 02:33 AM
Give me a break. :rolleyes:
My statment was true, because you are the first i ever encountered that claims such characteristics from an Apogee speaker. I dont know anyone who ever said the same thing. No review ever mentioned anything like the characteristics you mentioned.

Besides, i have no problem with you listening to what you like. I am content, since there is no other system i have ever heard i would trade for mine. The RM30 is one of the best box speakers i know, and the big Apogee is a dream....and i have it. I could seriously care less if you believe what i said or not. But placing Apogee, Wilson etc.. among the most overrated speakers thread shows the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems in my opinion. I always read from you that a 2K system can sound better than one for 20K, well what if the 20K system was just as nicely matched as the 2K system ....than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.

-Flo

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 04:01 AM
than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.
-Flo

Flo,

If High End is not High Fidelity that is "Hi-Fi" then what is the point? Does the High End now depart from higher fidelity. Indeed I have heard dealer say this however I regard it as arrogant misrepresentation, I accept that a well matched good quality 20K system is will sound better than a well matched good quality 2K system, all things being equal, by reason of higher fidelity.

Florian
04-14-2005, 04:28 AM
I think that the word HIFI has gotten a new meaning. If High End is simply Higher Fidelity than yes HIFI is equal to High End. But i think that HIFI is now used for commercial systems.

-Flo

MusicLG
04-14-2005, 05:02 AM
IMHO:
Bose
B&W
Paradign
And yes, Magnepan
Remember, the question was over-rated, not "good" or "bad".

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 05:04 AM
I think that the word HIFI has gotten a new meaning. If High End is simply Higher Fidelity than yes HIFI is equal to High End. But i think that HIFI is now used for commercial systems.
-Flo

I suppose you meant that "HIFI" means entry-level and some lower middle-level setups, since most systems apart from DIY are commercial i.e. available for sale or order on the open market. Saying that the dealer in question also used it to refer the setups I did not like, a strange twist since it meant that what is HIFI to me may not be HIFI to you.

kexodusc
04-14-2005, 05:08 AM
My statment was true, because you are the first i ever encountered that claims such characteristics from an Apogee speaker. I dont know anyone who ever said the same thing. No review ever mentioned anything like the characteristics you mentioned.
And yet there surely exists people who have opted NOT to buy the Apogee's in favor of something else...I find it funny that you spend so much time defending YOUR opinion, but you seem to find it perfectly acceptable to reject and attack Woochifer's opinion...Tell us, oh exhalted one, on what grounds do you hold that your opinion is better than anyone elses?

But placing Apogee, Wilson etc.. among the most overrated speakers thread shows the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems in my opinion.
And a statement like this demonstrates an unfortunate characteristic on your part. Envy? Good lord, do you really think people want to be like you, that they spend much of their time wishing they owned 20K systems. You seem to take great pleasure in mentioning the price you paid for your system earlier...Did it make you feel good? Personally, I pity people that feel the need to spend $20,000 in order to enjoy music. IMO, they've missed the point. Music and audio, whether they are the same or not, is NOT exclusive to the elite pillars of society. Having heard my fair share of $20,000, $100,000, and higher pricetag systems, I can comfortably say it takes a certain amount of neurosis mixed with creativity to justify some of these pricetags.
Envy? Is that criteria in your definition of Audiophile? Do you consider the ability of equipment to generate envy when shopping for gear?


I always read from you that a 2K system can sound better than one for 20K, well what if the 20K system was just as nicely matched as the 2K system ....than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.
You assume too much. If only you knew the fantastic markup on a $20,000 system, you wouldn't be so quick to write off the comparability of a $2000 system. There gets to be a point where you can continue to throw as much money as you want at the system and the improvements are so small they become arguably imaginary.

You sir, have a bad, "my gear is better than your gear, therefor I am superior to you" attitude. This unfortunately overshadows any merit your arguments may have.

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 05:55 AM
Personally, I pity people that feel the need to spend $20,000 in order to enjoy music. IMO, they've missed the point. Music and audio, whether they are the same or not, is NOT exclusive to the elite pillars of society. Having heard my fair share of $20,000, $100,000, and higher pricetag systems, I can comfortably say it takes a certain amount of neurosis mixed with creativity to justify some of these pricetag

No need to pity anybody, kexodusc, it is simply matter of personal choice, If an individual has the disposable income to buy a USD100K setup and proceeds to do so, it is their perogative and there is no neurosis involved whatsoever. Yes, music is not exclusive to the Elite pillars of the society, however the wherewithal to acquire the best equipment to reproduce is not available to everybody though everyone is entitled to enjoy it on whatever setup they desire or can afford, no need to sneer at those who can afford more, whether the markup on high value systems is much higher is irrelevant, if knowledgeable care and attention is paid to matching a USD20K system, it will sound superior to a USD2K system as a matter of fact. To push the issue further, how about if an individual can afford to spend 20K on a DIY (i.e. 20K solely on parts etc) system and he has the requisite expertise to put together a system with parts and labour of that value, will your comments still hold at all?

kexodusc
04-14-2005, 07:15 AM
No need to pity anybody, kexodusc, it is simply matter of personal choice, If an individual has the disposable income to buy a USD100K setup and proceeds to do so, it is their perogative and there is no neurosis involved whatsoever. Yes, music is not exclusive to the Elite pillars of the society, however the wherewithal to acquire the best equipment to reproduce is not available to everybody though everyone is entitled to enjoy it on whatever setup they desire or can afford, no need to sneer at those who can afford more, whether the markup on high value systems is much higher is irrelevant, if knowledgeable care and attention is paid to matching a USD20K system, it will sound superior to a USD2K system as a matter of fact.

STOP! You can have all the knowledge and care in the world put into that 20K system, and the undeniable truth remains it may not sound any better than the 2K system. Please define "better". "Better" to whom? What standards are we using here? I'm pretty sure you know, TAH, that a great deal of subjectivity is involved in assessing an audio system. I know I can speak for a lot of members when I say we've heard "carefully" constructed, 20K systems sound 18K too expensive. It's possible a 20K system might sound a bit better, might sound a lot better...18K better? Again, that's a subjective call, but to maintain this is a universal truth is, ahem, "overreaching" IMO. This is where I believe neurosis settles in...I'm not free of this problem with other indulgences in my life, but there's something undeniably irrational when we consciously spend X times more money for x/100 the improvement in performance...

I don't presume to prevent people from spending 100K on a system - it's their money and their business...but I maintain that these people, whether they admit it or not, are satisfying more than just a desire for accurate musical playback, at whatever levels those may be. There's an intangible feel-good attribute that comes with owning prestigious gear. There's a point where these items do become, in part, "trailer-queens". I'll admit to being guilty of this in other hobbies in my life, but I won't deny it. Materialism at it's worst. At some point, perhaps not 20 K, more than just sound influences the decision to buy...



To push the issue further, how about if an individual can afford to spend 20K on a DIY (i.e. 20K solely on parts etc) system and he has the requisite expertise to put together a system with parts and labour of that value, will your comments still hold at all?

Absolutely. Interesting you should bring my DIY hobby into this...may I ask why? What, did you expect me to say, "Geez, you know I never thought of that? Sign me up for some of that 20K DIY project experience".

I would consider any DIY project that approached 20K to be borderline ridiculous, and I know a few DIY'ers that will admit their own 7K projects were excercises in over-indulgence. What was the goal, "to build a system with the most expensive components I could find?" Please...
...only my opinion, but since opinion is being thrown around as cannon here, I think I'll use this to my advantage.

I absolutely do pity them. I feel very fortunate to not feel the need to spend so much money on a system for the purpose of accurate playback...I don't know what the limit is, I do know I haven't hit it...but damn, if you're spending 20K, 40K, 100K, and still haven't satisfied whatever needs you have for audio playback, then I do pity you...There's no other word for it...that's a pile of money that I'm sure could be put to better use for almost anyone. If there's nothing else you'd rather spend that last 40 K on when you already have a 20K system, then I think you need to get out and see the world a bit more. There's a point where I return to the lowly "mainstream" and just don't "get it" I guess...20K is probably close to it...and I'm proud to admit this. Yup, pity is the right word...to some, being able to do more with more is admirable, but me, I prefer to do more with less.
Call me neurotic.

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 08:22 AM
STOP! You can have all the knowledge and care in the world put into that 20K system, and the undeniable truth remains it may not sound any better than the 2K system.

Give me a break already, all things being equal, a thoughtfully assembled 20K system WILL sound better than a 2K system. I am specifically referring to addressing specific needs of a given individual subjective or otherwise, with requisite expertise, USD2K or USD20K, the 20K system WILL sound better, if you suggest otherwise you are simply in denial.


but damn, if you're spending 20K, 40K, 100K, and still haven't satisfied whatever needs you have for audio playback, then I do pity you...
It is not matter of satisfaction, but increased satisfaction and that point is determined by each person individually. Will they be satisfied with 1K system? Possibly, but why settle for that when you can afford 20K or more.


There's no other word for it...that's a pile of money that I'm sure could be put to better use for almost anyone. If there's nothing else you'd rather spend that last 40 K on when you already have a 20K system, then I think you need to get out and see the world a bit more.

There is not much to say to this than to say I pity you, this is twisted thinking, blasting Florian for looking contemptuously at a 2K system and at the same time trying to justify sneering at those that can afford much more, even going as far as calling these individuals neurotic, I enjoy what I own but that does not stop me considering 20K+ speakers, much in the same way as I do not see anything wrong in buying Mercedes Mclaren at GBP250K or whatever I consider to be of value. For the purposes of the discussion, There are loads of speakers above the USD10K that I may yet decide to own, are some of them overpriced, certainly, but does that bother me, not in the slightest? If anyone is able and willing to spend 100K on a system, more power to them.

At the end of the day, as the saying goes here, it is only money. Try not to get caught up in what folks spend on their system, boasting that you do not think a 80K system is worth it or not as the case may be is neither here or there. We can all make do with much less in many things, but I am happy that I can have much more, audio reproduction equipment included.

kexodusc
04-14-2005, 09:14 AM
It's difficult to discuss issues with someone who picks and chooses which points in an argument they will acknowledge and respond to, and decides when to take obvious idioms literally .
Safe to say I feel you've missed my point altogether.

Let me be clear:
I don't believe a person spending 20K or more on a system is neurotic by the standard definition...(though it was a very cool word to use at the time). I don't "sneer" at them, or look down upon them, as they look down upon the kid with the $1000 system. Rather, I pity them, as I said, for the extreme difficulty and great costs required for them to be happy.

I don't deny the increased satisfaction a person might feel when buying a 100K system.

I challenge that a 100K system is always better than say, a 50K system, or 20K system, even ceterus paribus. At 100K, I feel there are other factors than "sound" alone that come into play...Who's to say the intrinsic value of all 3 of these carefully crafted systems isn't only $4000? To imply a carefully crafted 100K system is better than 20K system all the time would suggest that every being on this planet would choose the 100K system over the 20K system, every single time. I'm quite sure that is as close to an absolute impossibility as we can have.


I maintaint that the assumption that cost and performance are strongly and directly correlated is a poor assumption to make. You ever chosen one similarly priced speaker over another?

I do have issue with the fact that those who spend more are somehow enlightened as to what sounds good, and bad, more so than a person with a 1K system.

The only issue with Florian I have is the "holier than thou" attitude he, as a moderator, seems to adopted in this thread.

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 09:54 AM
It's difficult to discuss issues with someone who picks and chooses which points in an argument they will acknowledge and respond to, and decides when to take obvious idioms literally .
Safe to say I feel you've missed my point altogether.


I generally take selected issues when I respond to posts so that I do not bugged down in trivia, apologies if you felt I took words too literally. In this case, the whole tone of your post was comtemptuous of those who spend a lot of money, more than what you deem acceptable, on their audio equipment. I highlighted idioms that I felt captured the overall tone of your post.

I don't believe a person spending 20K or more on a system is neurotic by the standard definition...(though it was a very cool word to use at the time). I don't "sneer" at them, or look down upon them, as they look down upon the kid with the $1000 system. Rather, I pity them, as I said, for the extreme difficulty and great costs required for them to be happy.

I don't deny the increased satisfaction a person might feel when buying a 100K system.

I challenge that a 100K system is always better than say, a 50K system, or 20K system, even ceterus paribus. At 100K, I feel there are other factors than "sound" alone that come into play...Who's to say the intrinsic value of all 3 of these carefully crafted systems isn't only $4000? To imply a carefully crafted 100K system is better than 20K system all the time would suggest that every being on this planet would choose the 100K system over the 20K system, every single time. I'm quite sure that is as close to an absolute impossibility as we can have.

I maintain that the assumption that cost and performance are strongly and directly correlated is a poor assumption to make. You ever chosen one similarly priced speaker over another?

There is correlation between price and performance, however the law of diminishing returns applies more forcefully as you climb the ladder, and in this respect audio is not different from many other items. To put it to you pointedly that median value of USD2K is simply a line drawn in the sand. As I maintain that a USD20K put together with requisite expertise will absolutely sound superior to a USD2K system within reason. Whether you feel the improvements worth the extra 18K is another matter entirely, showing contempt (pity, looking down or whatever word you use in its place) to those that think the improvements is worth the extra money in unacceptable and stinking thinking.


I do have issue with the fact that those who spend more are somehow enlightened as to what sounds good, and bad, more so than a person with a 1K system.
I did not say anybody who can afford more than USD1K system is more enlighted, I said that they can increase their enjoyment of the music they like, improved sound quality if it matters to them, by investing more money in their audio reproduction equipment and better quality software where available.


The only issue with Florian I have is the "holier than thou" attitude he, as a moderator, seems to adopted in this thread.
Only to replace it with a "holier than thou" attitude of your own.

Florian
04-14-2005, 10:32 AM
? Good lord, do you really think people want to be like you, that they spend much of their time wishing they owned 20K systems. You seem to take great pleasure in mentioning the price you paid for your system earlier..

Your funny, because i never said how much i spent. Yes my system has a new price of close to 20K. But i never paid that..... :p

Florian
04-14-2005, 10:37 AM
Well this is the end of this discussion. I could enjoy a 500$ system, but why should I ? I have a 20K system and yes it will beat the crap out of any 2K system in regards to Transparency, Dynamics, Bass extionsion, holographic imaging, precision, life like sound etc...

I one of the few that always support beginners and pictures in the gallery where the equiment is 500$. I have startet with a 45$ system.

I can live with the fact that there are systems below 1K and i can live with the fact that there are 100K systems.

And if you cant differentiate a 1K system to a 20K system, than thats good for you since you dont need to spend any more money.

-Flo

kexodusc
04-14-2005, 10:47 AM
I generally take selected issues when I respond to posts so that I do not bugged down in trivia, apologies if you felt I took words too literally.
Convenient

In this case, the whole tone of your post was comtemptuous of those who spend a lot of money
Contempt? As in disdain, dislike, hatred? You're way off...Don't know what else I can say. If I said you were in left field, I'd be too generous. Here's an invitation for you to put me in my place once and for all, as I grow weary of your miscontruing my statements, whether deliberate or accidental...Are you ready, here goes:

Find me one example where I demonstrate anything remotely close to contempt to people who "spend alot of money" -- (fyi: I spend a lot of money).
If you cannot, kindly apologize.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this medium (ie: web forum) doesn't capture the "tone" I would otherwise be portraying.

I'm afraid you have it ass backwards. There are two occurances of "contempt" here:
1) The "holier than thou attitude" of some, lumping those without gear of an as yet to be disclosed monetary value as having "the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems"
2) My contempt for such statements.



There is correlation between price and performance, however the law of diminishing returns applies more forcefully as you climb the ladder, and in this respect audio is not different from many other items. To put it to you pointedly that median value of USD2K is simply a line drawn in the sand. As I maintain that a USD20K put together with requisite expertise will absolutely sound superior to a USD2K system within reason. Whether you feel the improvements worth the extra 18K is another matter entirely, showing contempt (pity, looking down etc) to those that think the improvements is worth the extra money in unacceptable and stinking thinking.
I'm afraid you continue to repeat yourself over and over again, but you still aren't making sense...let me hold your hand and walk you through this one -
Let's assume we poll 100 people, asking which of the two systems they prefer (performance-wise), the 100K or the 20K...even if it is 90/10 in favor of the 100K system, the truth remains that subjectivity exists, and the 100K system is not universally "better" than the 20K system. There's just too much personal tastes to make such a statement.
Let's use another extreme example...I'm fairly confident a 100K, but properly matching Bose system won't outperform a 20K Magnepan system.

Oddly enough, you admit the diminishing returns, yet you fail to admit the possibility that beyond 20K, the returns are so small, so incremental that, that added benefit of a more expensive system isn't always enough to create a clear winner 100% of the time.
I would argue that the 80K pricetag difference might really only contribute a mere fraction of a percentage in terms of performance benefits, which may or may not make it "better" to the audience.



I did not say anybody who can afford more than USD1K system is more enlighted,
I did not accuse you of this...I was referring to the man you appear to be defending when he stated such condescending things as "the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems" and his use of a new paradigm "hifi vs. hi-end" (a statement which you also appeared to at least have some issue with) - after appearing to gloat about the cost of his system.



I said that they can increase their enjoyment of the music they like, improved sound quality if it matters to them, by investing more money in their audio reproduction equipment and better quality software where available.
On this I don't disagree, they can do whatever they wish to increase their enjoyment...provided they are careful, if not at least polite, when quantifying how superior their systems are in terms of performance to those of others.



Only to replace it with a "holier than thou" attitude of your own.
If my taking issue with the arrogance of others comes off as "holier than thou"...so be it.
Respectfully, I think if you read my posts again, you'll change your mind.

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 11:18 AM
kexodusc,

I have said my piece and since I will rather not respond to your posts in full my previous post will suffice. In my previous posts, I write "all things being equal" i.e. comparing like for like, so when I read your Bose v Magnepan comments, it's big laugh. My last two posts remain as is, when the dust has settled reread your posts and mine, the issues I have against your responses are valid. Yes, Florian is showing off but so are you. Try not to feel pity for those who choose to spend a lot more than your median value on audio equipment, respect their choices, it is a twisted attitude when you don't.

Florian
04-14-2005, 11:21 AM
How am i showing off? By owning a system of a high pricetag?

-Flo

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 11:23 AM
Well this is the end of this discussion. I could enjoy a 500$ system, but why should I ? I have a 20K system and yes it will beat the crap out of any 2K system in regards to Transparency, Dynamics, Bass extionsion, holographic imaging, precision, life like sound etc...

I one of the few that always support beginners and pictures in the gallery where the equiment is 500$. I have startet with a 45$ system.
I can live with the fact that there are systems below 1K and i can live with the fact that there are 100K systems.

And if you cant differentiate a 1K system to a 20K system, than thats good for you since you dont need to spend any more money.

-Flo

I see Florian, you just had to tell that the total MSRP value of your new setup is close to 20K, congrats on your charity work :D :rolleyes: .

Enjoy your new setup, but try to use less broad brushes in the future.;)

Florian
04-14-2005, 11:26 AM
Ok i see your point. But everyone can calculate that based on the signatures and profiles :p

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 11:28 AM
Deleted in light on Flo's last response.

Florian
04-14-2005, 11:29 AM
Thats not true, i was simply stating that i do not need a 20K system in order to enjoy the music. I would be happy with a 500$ system too, but i have had the oppertunity to buy such a expensive system, so i did.

-Flo

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 11:37 AM
Thats not true, i was simply stating that i do not need a 20K system in order to enjoy the music. I would be happy with a 500$ system too, but i have had the oppertunity to buy such a expensive system, so i did.

-Flo

Would I be happy listening on a USD500 rig, when I could get much better for not much more relatively speaking? I don't think so. Do I need a 20K system to enjoy music? No, but I certainly want something more than USD500. The satellite radio and TDK S80 speakers have their place.

Florian
04-14-2005, 11:40 AM
See thats what i mean. I have no issues with lower priced setups, but i had the money to buy the expensive system so why shouldn''t i? Ofcourse its a huge amount of money, and i dont really need it. But i would sure miss it if i were to buy lower end equipment. Why should i suffer attacks, just because of the high prices?

-Flo

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 11:47 AM
*** Why should i suffer attacks, just because of the high prices? ***

You shouldn't if you couch the information more tactfully ;) :D , I like some of the pieces in your system and know their prices, some I probably do not care for, but hey it is your system, you probably do not care for my choices either. :D

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 12:36 PM
Find me one example where I demonstrate anything remotely close to contempt to people who "spend alot of money" -- (fyi: I spend a lot of money).
If you cannot, kindly apologize.



If there's nothing else you'd rather spend that last 40 K on when you already have a 20K system, then I think you need to get out and see the world a bit more. There's a point where I return to the lowly "mainstream" and just don't "get it" I guess...20K is probably close to it...and I'm proud to admit this. Yup, pity is the right word...to some, being able to do more with more is admirable, but me, I prefer to do more with less..


I don't presume to prevent people from spending 100K on a system - it's their money and their business...but I maintain that these people, whether they admit it or not, are satisfying more than just a desire for accurate musical playback, at whatever levels those may be. There's an intangible feel-good attribute that comes with owning prestigious gear. There's a point where these items do become, in part, "trailer-queens". I'll admit to being guilty of this in other hobbies in my life, but I won't deny it. Materialism at it's worst. At some point, perhaps not 20 K, more than just sound influences the decision to buy...

Here are examples for your records, "Pity" is being used here as an expression of contempt, as in condescending.

[DELETED]Here are examples for your records, "Pity" is being used here as a polite expression of contempt as in condescending and disdain.[DELETED]

kexodusc
04-14-2005, 02:45 PM
Here are examples for your records, "Pity" is being used here as a polite expression of contempt, as in condescending and disdain.

You've done an excellent job of misconstruing most of my posts...why stop now? :rolleyes:

"Polite expression of contempt"...as opposed to the traditional "mean expression of contempt"?
That's the best you could come up with? I figured as much. How long did it take you to come up with this arbitrary (and inaccurate) definition of "pity" as it's used?

Those phrases quite simply express my belief that these people are over-indulging...that's not spiteful, there's no contempt, merely a minor disagreement. I can't believe I even had to type this for you...

Geoffcin
04-14-2005, 03:42 PM
No matter what gets posted under this header it's likely to offend someone. I think it's time to voluntarily call it quits before things get so heated that we have another unfortunate thread closing.

Woochifer
04-14-2005, 05:30 PM
Give me a break. :rolleyes:
My statment was true, because you are the first i ever encountered that claims such characteristics from an Apogee speaker. I dont know anyone who ever said the same thing. No review ever mentioned anything like the characteristics you mentioned.

Again, more BS. How could your statements possibly be true? Here are your exact quotes.

"You are the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever."

"Every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible"

Like I said, does that mean that you've polled every single person who's ever heard the Apogees or Scintillas? Unless you've done so and can confirm 100% of the pool agreeing with you, then these blanket statements are nothing but a pack of false exaggerations. And as I've already mentioned, I personally know three people who've listened to Apogees in different settings, and had similar reactions that I did -- i.e. nice speaker in certain facets, but not worthy of all the hype.

Keep in mind that I was listening to the Apogees when you were in diapers, so I can put "overrated" in the proper context of how persistently they got hyped when they first came out.

Nice to see though that you've conveniently backtracked from your earlier statements, so apology accepted.


I could seriously care less if you believe what i said or not.

If not, then why persist in making these kinds of ridiculous presumptions about my mindset and motivations?


But placing Apogee, Wilson etc.. among the most overrated speakers thread shows the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems in my opinion.

LOL! Nice to know that I'm now a jealous and clueless person in your eyes. You're just throwing out yet another example of the presumption that I'd mentioned earlier. The fact that you persist in using that line of reasoning indicates to me that it hasn't quite sunk in yet. Oh well, miracles can happen.

If someone wants to throw out the big bucks on Apogee or Wilson systems, then I have no problem with that whatsoever. Logically speaking here, why would I envy anyone who wants to pay that much for a set of speakers when they don't fit my preferences to begin with? Taken in that context, your point makes no sense whatsoever.

And let me just clue you in one last time. I regard the Apogees and Wilsons as overrated precisely because of the persistent acclaim that they receive. I personally feel that it's misplaced based on my listenings. Has nothing to do with the pricetag because there are plenty of similarly high priced and acclaimed speakers that I don't regard as overrated. So, your petty presumptions about me don't serve you well in this case either.


I always read from you that a 2K system can sound better than one for 20K, well what if the 20K system was just as nicely matched as the 2K system ....than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.

-Flo

You "always" read from me that a $2k system can sound better than a $20k system? Why don't you cite some examples that demonstrate how frequently I make that point. It's yet another blanket statement that has little bearing to the point at hand, and little in the way of truth behind it.

I didn't know that price correlated to sound quality so exactly. Are you saying that everything in that upper price strata will sound better than a $2k system?

Florian
04-14-2005, 11:01 PM
No matter what gets posted under this header it's likely to offend someone. I think it's time to voluntarily call it quits before things get so heated that we have another unfortunate thread closing.
I call it quits.

theaudiohobby
04-14-2005, 11:41 PM
I call it quits.
ditto

E-Stat
04-15-2005, 05:52 AM
No matter what gets posted under this header it's likely to offend someone. I think it's time to voluntarily call it quits before things get so heated that we have another unfortunate thread closing.
Gee, it got a bit warm in here, didn't it? :)

rw

JoeE SP9
04-15-2005, 10:59 AM
I still want to know where you can get new Apogee's

Florian
04-15-2005, 11:01 AM
I still want to know where you can get new Apogee's
Well you cant get "NEW" Apogee's. But you can get better than new ones. Just buy a used pair on Audiogon.com or ebay.com etc.. and buy new TLC ribbons from Gratz in Australia. Just PM me, and ill tell ya all about it.

Mind you that a fully, better then new Apogee Scintilla (if you want to go that high) will run you about 8K US once your done.

-Flo

PS: But there are some used Caliper, Duettas out there.

JoeE SP9
04-15-2005, 11:19 PM
Please excuse me Florian. I was just messing with you. I am aware of the replacement ribbons. I don't think that ribbon replacement makes it a new speaker. I have heard almost everything Apogee made including a pair of Concert Grands. I almost bought a pair of Mini Grands at Soundex a couple of years ago. I didn't bite because I'm really quite happy with what I have. After all I do have 4 timbre matched speakers. Also, my tube amps are totally insufficient for driving Apogees.

theaudiohobby
04-16-2005, 02:01 AM
Please excuse me Florian. I was just messing with you. I am aware of the replacement ribbons. I don't think that ribbon replacement makes it a new speaker. I have heard almost everything Apogee made including a pair of Concert Grands. I almost bought a pair of Mini Grands at Soundex a couple of years ago. I didn't bite because I'm really quite happy with what I have. After all I do have 4 timbre matched speakers. Also, my tube amps are totally insufficient for driving Apogees.
http://www.analysisaudio.com/Om.jpg
The analysisaudio line of loudspeakers are very interesting and according to the manufacturers relatively easy to drive.