Quote Originally Posted by Pat D
It would actually help if you read what Audioholics said about the B & W 602 S1:

http://www.audioholics.com/productre...faceoff3_c.php

They explicitly said it was an older model and the newer versions were better. Maybe it is useful sometimes to compare older speakers to newer models. Some manufacturers managed to get it right years ago, and build speakers that do stand up well today.

One thing I've learned from your posts on speakers is that my tastes in speakers are apparently quite different from yours--as is the case with some reviewers, Art Dudley being one.

You rail about Audioholics' rating system, which includes value for cost as a factor. Funny you don't complain when other mags do the same thing. This is one problem with reviews here at AR, too, because it certainly appears to me that most people rate on a cost/value basis. I don't know what to do about that, and separating the quality and value ratings doesn't seem to me to do it; but many of the narrative reviews seem helpful. But I agree, I would much rather have a "blind" rating, irrespective of cost, like they do at the National Research Council facilities in Ottawa, you know, those tests you so love to diss.

Do we have any objective measurements of those Audio Note speakers, by the way, or have you just been taking Peter Qvortrup's word for it?
Well first you know I don't value the measurements that don't tell you anything about sound...or gee the subjective review would correlate with the measurements...none of the subjective reviews of the De Capo correlate - consensus is generally a great lifelike high end speaker. Can't be said about some of the flatter responses? Measurement therefore are not accurate to what is "liked."

Audioholics would make more sense if they were comparing similarly priced speakers...like What hi-fi. No problems with giving a speaker 5 stars or a 10/10 in a given price range. But they have a "perceived" performance/value rating that only a buyer can determine. The B&W bass response is a warmer presentation and is not nearly as punchy. Well if you like the less punchy then it's a better speaker for your needs. No matter what it's measurements are. You're an odd fellow since you rely SO heavily on graphs then tell people not to rely on them totally.

The FACT of the matter is the ONLY way you can rely on a graph is if you sample about a 100 speakers find the ones you like "subjectively" and then get access to ALL of the graphs. If you chose ten from that 100 and they all measure roughly the same then you have an idea of what is best. The NRC tests posted at Harman are incomplete small and not useful for regular buyers. Tests are too small A/B and not the way a normal person sets up their speakers...it's all done by someone else...which is not the normal listening environment which makes it invalid...look up validity...it's not never will be period. Another advertising gimmick - it works people buy a lot of irritating dreck in the name of accuracy. At the listening position in your room is the ONLY thing that would count. And that graph would change in every room.

A slight lilt in the treble is to me and many people FAR worse than almost any other anomolie. Mid Bass Hump for example is not overly irritating to me...especially if amplified rock is your bag.

As for the Audio Note's why do you care? You can e-mail Hi Fi Choice for the measurements perhaps...of the An E/D - all their speakers have a similar sound http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=475 I'd be more interested in the fact that in a blind level matched room they sounded worthy of recommendation. That speaker can be bought new for $2000.00CDN. So that Value rating would rise no doubt. Though they do reference their measurements a little at least.

I would suggest looking up the measurements of the very original Snell designs but the changes AN has made are fairly large in that the AN's are corner near wall placements where the Snells were not.

Also all Audio Note amplifiers, DACS, etc are measured or tested through Audio Note speakers...so presumably you might get information about the speaker indirectly through the ancillary gear. Can't build a good amp with hopeless speakers - if you build part of that sound by ear.

You can also ask about the AN E with your good buddoies at Stereophile since it was the speaker they used to test tube amplifiers with - presumably they would want a relatively accurate speaker or good speaker to do that no? http://www.stereophile.com/reference/357/index1.html

And buyers are telling. Despite the looks they're doing pretty well. Despite no reviews of the AN K and the fact that I never heard of them...compared to the De Capo, N801, Studio series, ML and a host of others I have already mentioned on the old forum thread, side by side with some of them...it beat them all...the De Capo was closestdo it's smoother presentation but the soundstage had a character in depth that was always there on a all recording which while I like it - in the end i wanted a more straight shooter. (plus I preferred the treble response of the original version ... rolled off but not as hot.